State v. Vessichio’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
2 district · 118 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 120 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably State v. Pollitt (1987), State v. Berger (1999)
2 district · 118 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 In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Ohio v. Roberts · Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory · United States v. Nixon · California v. Trombetta
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 120 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Statements made by coconspirators are recognized in Connecticut as an exception to the general prohibition against hearsay. See State v. Vessichio , 197 Conn. 644 , 653-60, 500 A.2d 1311 (1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1122 , 106 S.Ct. 1642 , 90 L.Ed. 2d 187 (1986). However, [b]efore such statements may be admitted, the trial judge must make a preliminary determination that there is sufficient independent evidence to establish the following: (1) that a conspiracy existed ... (2) that the conspiracy was still in existence at the time the statement was made ... (3) that the declarations were made in furtherance of the conspiracy ... and (4) that both the declarant and the defendant participated in the conspiracy .... The court must make its preliminary determination by a fair preponderance of the evidence independent of the hearsay utterances ... a standard which is lower than the standard of evidence required to submit a charge of conspiracy to the jury.... Once the threshold requirement for admissibility is satisfied by a showing of a likelihood of an illicit association between the declarant and the defendant ... the conspirators' statements are admissible and they might tip the scale in favor of the defendant's guilt ....”
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.