172 Conn. App. 108 - State v. Bonds’s Empirical Analysis
2017
Citation profile
20
cited by 20 later decisions
1
states following
July 2025
most recently cited
20 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Crawford v. Washington · Ohio v. Roberts · Chambers v. Mississippi · Idaho v. Wright · Bethlehem Steel Corp. v. Pemberton
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“As to what is against penal interest, quite obviously the essential characteristic is the exposure to risk of punishment for a crime .... Moreover, it is not the fact that the declaration is against interest but awareness of that fact by the declarant which gives the statement significance.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“In short, the admissibility of a hearsay statement pursuant to § 8-6 (4) of the Connecticut Code of Evidence is subject to a binary inquiry: (1) whether [the] statement ... was against [the declarant's] penal interest and, if so, (2) whether the statement was sufficiently trustworthy.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.