State v. Beliveau’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

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

1. “The proffering party bears the burden of establishing the relevance of the offered testimony. Unless a proper foundation is established, the evidence is irrelevant .... Relevance may be established in one of three ways. First, the proffering party can make an offer of proof .... Second, the record can itself be adequate to establish the relevance of the proffered testimony .... Third, the proffering party can establish a proper foundation for the testimony by stating a good faith belief that there is an adequate factual basis for his or her inquiry.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 175 Conn. App. 838 - State v. Halili

2. “In order to comport with the constitutional standards embodied in the confrontation clause, the trial court must allow a defendant to expose to the jury facts from which the jurors, as the sole triers of fact and credibility, could appropriately draw inferences relating to the reliability of the witness.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Quintana v. Commissioner of Corrections, No. Cv-89-723 (Mar. 2, 1998)

3. “Additional facts will be recited as necessary to address the questions presented.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 1998 Conn. Super. Ct. 625 - Connecticut Post Ltd. Parts. v. Allen, No. Cvnh 9610-7875 (Jan. 12, 1998)