State v. Ceballos’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

238 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 240 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[W]e have previously recognized that a prompt cautionary instruction to the jury regarding improper prosecutorial remarks or questions can obviate any possible harm to the defendant .... Moreover, [i]n the absence of an indication to the contrary, the jury is presumed to have followed [the trial court's] curative instructions.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 171 Conn. App. 311 - State v. McCoy · State v. McCoy

2. “[A]lthough there exists evidence in the present case supporting the defendant's conviction despite the lack of direct physical evidence linking the defendant to the sexual assault of the victim-namely, the victim's testimony and the testimony of her mother and cousin-without independent physical evidence to prove that the defendant sexually assaulted [the victim], or even that [the victim] had been sexually assaulted at all, the significance of the [prosecutor's] improper conduct increases considerably.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. A. M.

3. “We begin with the well established proposition that [a] prosecutor may not appeal to the emotions, passions and prejudices of the jurors.... When the prosecutor appeals to emotions, he invites the jury to decide the case, not according to a rational appraisal of the evidence, but on the basis of powerful and irrelevant factors which are likely to skew that appraisal.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 168 Conn. App. 321 - State v. Elias V.