State v. Sawyer’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
139 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 139 later decisions — most recently August 2021 · most notably State v. DeJesus (2008), State v. McKenzie-Adams (2007)
139 state decisions
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 Texas v. New Mexico · School Board of Nassau County, Florida, Et Al. v. Arline · State v. Kulmac · State v. Esposito · State v. Figueroa
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 139 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“This provision is patterned after the analogous provision of the Penal Code. See ... General Statutes § 53a-4. [9] It will provide some degree of flexibility and common law creativity on the part of a court that is confronted with an evidentiary question that is not covered, either explicitly or implicitly, by the [c]ode. " (Emphasis added.) D. Borden, supra, p. at 215. "Thus, this section of the [c]ode provides the courts with our full panoply of traditional powers in interpreting the [c]ode and our full common-law powers in fashioning new rules of evidence for instances that are not covered by the [c]ode either explicitly or implicitly.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. State v. DeJesus“the following conclusions could not be more clear. First, the [c]ode has adopted codified our law of evidence as it existed in our case law at the time of the [c]ode's adoption. Second, if a matter is covered by the [c]ode, this court cannot change the rule; that function is for the evidence code oversight committee, the rules committee of the Superior Court, and ultimately for the judges of the Superior Court. This court may, of course, as may any court, interpret the [c]ode, as applied to any set of facts in a given case.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. State v. DeJesus“The rationale for having a [code] is that it will be easier and more efficient for all of the relevant actors in the litigation processjudges and lawyersto have a code, stated in concise and familiar black letter form, to which to refer. It will be printed in a separate paperback volume, like the new Practice Book format, that every judge will have with him or her on the bench, and each practitioner will be able to bring to court with him or her. Thus, everyone will be on the same page, to coin a phrase.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. State v. DeJesus
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.