Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 241 CONN 802 - State v. Pouncey

State v. Pouncey’s Empirical Analysis

1997

Citation profile

111
cited by 111 later decisions
2
states following
March 2025
most recently cited

111 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 111 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably State v. Singh (2002), State v. Hines (1998)

111 state decisions

6601997200020102020decided

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 Duncan v. State of Louisiana · McNabb v. United States · United States v. Hasting · Bank of Nova Scotia v. United States · Rita 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 111 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The standards that [are] set under this supervisory authority are not satisfied by observance of those minimal historic safeguards for securing trial by reason which are summarized as due process of law . . . the standards are flexible and are to be determined in the interests of justice.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “Thus, even when prosecutorial misconduct is not so egregious as to implicate the defendant's right to a fair trial, an Appellate Court may invoke its supervisory authority to reverse a criminal conviction when the prosecutor deliberately engages in conduct that he or she knows, or ought to know , is improper (emphasis added). . . . Such a sanction generally is appropriate, however, only when the `[prosecutor's] conduct is so offensive to the sound administration of justice that only a new trial can effectively prevent such assaults on the integrity of the tribunal.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “the extent of prejudice to the defendant; the emotional trauma to the victims or others likely to result from reliving their experiences at a new trial; the practical problems of memory loss and unavailability of witnesses after much time has elapsed; and the availability of other sanctions for such misconduct.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.