173 Conn. App. 227 - State v. Chankar’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

12 state decisions

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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Although there are restrictions on a prosecutor's ability to express a personal opinion during closing argument, [i]t is not improper for the prosecutor to comment upon the evidence presented at trial and to argue the inferences that the jurors might draw therefrom.... We must give the jury the credit of being able to differentiate between argument on the evidence and attempts to persuade them to draw inferences in the state's favor, on one hand, and improper unsworn testimony, with the suggestion of secret knowledge, on the other hand.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 187 Conn. App. 537 - State v. Jerrell R.

2. “[B]ecause closing arguments often have a rough and tumble quality about them, some leeway must be afforded to the advocates in offering arguments to the jury in final argument. [I]n addressing the jury, [c]ounsel must be allowed a generous latitude in argument, as the limits of legitimate argument and fair comment cannot be determined precisely by rule and line, and something must be allowed for the zeal of counsel in the heat of argument.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 176 Conn. App. 637 - State v. Danovan T.

3. “We do not scrutinize each individual comment [made by the prosecutor] in a vacuum, but rather we must review the comments complained of in the context of the entire trial.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 176 Conn. App. 637 - State v. Danovan T.