Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 201 CONN 125 - State v. Edwards

State v. Edwards’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

90
cited by 90 later decisions
7
states following
August 2023
most recently cited

90 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 90 later decisions — most recently August 2023 · most notably State v. Decaro (2000), State v. Jennings (1990)

90 state decisions

34019861990200020102020decided

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

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2106

Relies on Manson v. Brathwaite · Holloway v. Arkansas · Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · National Labor Relations Board v. International Longshoremen's Ass'n · Hullum v. United States

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

  1. “A person is guilty of forgery in the second degree when, with intent to defraud, deceive or injure another, he falsely makes, completes or alters a written instrument or issues or possesses any written instrument which he knows to be forged, which is or purports to be, or which is calculated to become or represent if completed: ... (2) a public record or an instrument filed or required or authorized by law to be filed in or with a public office or public servant ....”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “The jury's verdict on the second count necessarily determined that the state had proven all the elements of accessory to robbery in the third degree beyond a reasonable doubt upon which the trial court instructed the jury. Under the circumstances of this case, the reduction of the defendant's conviction on the second count to the lesser included offense cannot prejudice the defendant.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “`[S]tate and federal appellate courts have long exercised the power to reverse a conviction while at the same time ordering the entry of judgment on a lesser-included offense.' This court has never availed itself of the opportunity to adopt this practice, but we shall implement it in this case.”
    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.