State v. ERIC M.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 37 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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “A sentencing judge has very broad discretion in imposing any sentence within the statutory limits and in exercising that discretion he may and should consider matters that would not be admissible at trial.... It is a fundamental sentencing principle that a sentencing judge may appropriately conduct an inquiry broad in scope, and largely unlimited either as to the kind of information he may consider or the source from which it may come....”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 179 Conn. App. 831 - State v. Robert S. · State v. Stevens

2. “[a] sentencing judge has very broad discretion in imposing any sentence within the statutory limits and in exercising that discretion he may and should consider matters that would not be admissible at trial.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. TARASCO · State v. Lopez

3. “In reviewing a claim of judicial bias, this court employs a plain error standard of review.... The standard to be employed is an objective one, not the judge's subjective view as to whether he or she can be fair and impartial in hearing the case.... Any conduct that would lead a reasonable [person] knowing all the circumstances to the conclusion that the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned is a basis for the judge's disqualification.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 165 Conn. App. 195 - State v. Carlos C.