Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 291 Conn. 49 - State v. Cyr

State v. Cyr’s Empirical Analysis

2009

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
1
states following
October 2023
most recently cited

20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently October 2023

20 state decisions

140200920102020decided

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 State v. Morrill · Falvey v. Women & Infants Hospital · State v. Swift · Gallagher v. Commonwealth · State v. Patterson

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

  1. “When assessing whether the state has sufficient evidence to show probable cause to support continuing prosecution [following a motion to dismiss under § 54-56 ], the court must view the proffered proof, and draw reasonable inferences from that proof, in the light most favorable to the state. State v. Kinchen , 243 Conn. 690 , 702, 707 A.2d 1255 (1998) ; State v. Morrill , 193 Conn. 602 , 611, 478 A.2d 994 (1984). The quantum of evidence necessary to [overcome a motion to dismiss] ... is less than the quantum necessary to establish proof beyond a reasonable doubt at trial .... In [ruling on the defendant's motion to dismiss], the court [must] determine whether the [state's] evidence would warrant a person of reasonable caution to believe that the [defendant had] committed the crime.... State v. Patterson , 213 Conn. 708 , 720, 570 A.2d 174 (1990).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “A motion to dismiss ... properly attacks the jurisdiction of the court, essentially asserting that the [state] cannot as a matter of law and fact state a cause of action that should be heard by the court .... Accordingly, [o]ur review of the trial court's ultimate legal conclusion and resulting [decision to grant] ... the motion to dismiss will be de novo.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.