State v. Kono’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

36 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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “if the federal constitution does not clearly and definitively resolve the issue in the defendant's favor, we turn first to the state constitution to ascertain whether its provisions entitle the defendant to relief.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. State v. Taupier · State v. Davis

2. “a strict apartment versus single-family house distinction [regarding curtilage] is troubling because it would apportion Fourth Amendment protections on grounds that correlate with income, race, and ethnicity.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. 185 Conn. App. 308 - State v. Correa · State v. Edstrom

3. “[I]n determining the contours of the protections provided by our state constitution, we employ a multifactor approach that we first adopted in [ State v. Geisler , 222 Conn. 672 , 685, 610 A.2d 1225 (1992) ]. The factors that we consider are (1) the text of the relevant constitutional provisions; (2) related Connecticut precedents; (3) persuasive federal precedents; (4) persuasive precedents of other state courts; (5) historical insights into the intent of [the] constitutional [framers]; and (6) contemporary understandings of applicable economic and sociological norms [otherwise described as public policies].... We have noted, however, that these factors may be inextricably interwoven, and not every [such] factor is relevant in all cases.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. State v. Taupier