State v. Colton’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
4 district · 55 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 61 later decisions — most recently March 2010 · most notably State v. Ruth (1980), Olson v. Accessory Controls & Equipment Corp. (2000)
4 district · 55 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Bruton v. United States · State v. Evans · Eason v. Dandridge · Luckenbach Steamship Co. v. Zim Israel Navigation Co. · United States v. Leonard
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 61 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““that [petitioner’s] attorney should have been allowed to impeach Young by asking him on cross-examination whether he had been adjudicated insane. The state’s objection to this question was sustained and an exception was taken. Then a discussion took place outside the hearing of the jury where it was revealed that at one time Young had been found not guilty by reason of insanity and confined and treat ed for mental illness pursuant to General Statutes § 53a-47. The court and both counsel reached agreement that the question was improper, but that defense counsel could question Young about his mental condition at the present time or at the time of the conspiracy. Upon the jury’s return defense counsel followed this line of inquiry.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““We find no merit in the defendant’s assertion that the verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity was admissible as a prior conviction.””
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.