Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 253 CONN 392 - State v. Quinet

State v. Quinet’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

33
cited by 33 later decisions
1
states following
September 2021
most recently cited

33 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently September 2021 · most notably State v. James G. (2004), Mead v. Commissioner of Correction (2007)

33 state decisions

250200020102020decided

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 Fertel-Rust v. Dane County Social Services · 63 Cal. 2d 740 - In Re Estrada · Hiatt v. Indiana State Student Assistance Commission · Garner v. Jones · State v. Ross

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

  1. “The process of statutory interpretation involves a reasoned search for the intention of the legislature. . . . In other words, [the court seeks] to determine, in a reasoned manner, the meaning of the statutory language as applied to the facts of [the] case. . . . In seeking to determine that meaning, we look to the words of the statute itself, to the legislative history and circumstances surrounding its enactment, to the legislative policy it was designed to implement, and to its relationship to existing legislation and common law principles governing the same general subject matter.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “In choosing between two constructions of a statute, one valid and one constitutionally precarious, we will search for an effective and constitutional construction that reasonably accords with the legislature's underlying intent.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[Our Supreme Court] will not give retrospective effect to a criminal statute absent a clear legislative expression of such intent.”
    2 later decisions 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.