Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 211 CONN 441 - State v. Almeda

State v. Almeda’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

95
cited by 95 later decisions
5
states following
October 2025
most recently cited

95 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 95 later decisions — most recently October 2025 · most notably State v. Newsome (1996), State v. Patterson (1994)

95 state decisions

57019891990200020102020decided

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 Benton v. Maryland · Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Dobbert v. Florida · Miller v. Florida · O’Callahan v. Parker, Warden

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

  1. “[T]he main purpose of the statute of limitations [is] . . . timely notice to the defendant of the factual allegations against which he will be required to defend.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““(b) No person may be prosecuted for any offense, except a capital felony, a class A felony or a violation of section 53a-54d, for which the punishment is or may be imprisonment in excess of one year, except within five years next after the offense has been committed. No person may be prosecuted for any other offense, except a capital felony, a class A felony or a violation of section 53a-54d, except within one year next after the offense has been committed.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “In reviewing the [legal] sufficiency of the evidence concerning this element of assault in the first degree, our task is to construe the evidence in the light most favorable to sustaining the jury's verdict, and then to determine whether any rational trier of fact could have * found that the harm suffered rose to the level of a serious physical injury under the statute.”
    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.