Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 241 CONN 784 - State v. Coleman

State v. Coleman’s Empirical Analysis

1997

Citation profile

110
cited by 110 later decisions
1
states following
April 2017
most recently cited

110 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 110 later decisions — most recently April 2017 · most notably State v. Hines (1998), Gaudio v. Griffin Health Services Corp. (1999)

110 state decisions

560199720002010decided

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 Kerr v. United States District Court for the Northern District of California · 111 S. Ct. 425 - Insurance Co. of Pennsylvania v. Ben Cooper, Inc. · King v. Lynaugh · In re Golub · State v. Prioleau

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

  1. “[i]t is the generally accepted rule that in a case in which the defendant is charged with the offense of burglary, after proof of the burglary has been introduced the prosecution may show that the defendant had burglar tools or implements in his possession soon after the time of the commission of the offense and may introduce such tools or implements in evidence.... Sanders v. United States , 238 F.2d 145 , 147 (10th Cir. 1956) ; see also State v. Thomas , [ 205 Conn. 279 , 283, 533 A.2d 553 (1987) ] (where victim bound by rope, testimony regarding clothesline in defendant's basement admissible to show defendant had access to rope); State v. Miller , 202 Conn. 463 , 482, 522 A.2d 249 (1987) (where victim bound by handcuffs, evidence that handcuffs were used at defendant's workplace admissible to show defendant's access to handcuffs); State v. Smith , 198 Conn. 147 , 157, 502 A.2d 874 (1985) (where defendant threatened victim with gun, evidence that gun with similar appearance was in defendant's possession shortly after crime admissible to show defendant's access to gun); State v. Paoletto , 181 Conn. 172 , 184-86, 434 A.2d 954 (1980) (in burglary case where entry was gained by forcibly tearing down door of building, evidence of pry bar and screwdriver found in defendant's possession admissible to show defendant's access to type of burglary tools used).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “The trial testimony indicated that the defendant had entered the victim's apartment by way of slits made in the window screen by a sharp cutting instrument. The state introduced evidence of the knives to show that the defendant, twenty-two hours after the offense, had a number of sharp cutting instruments at his immediate disposal.”
    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.