State v. Carter’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Due process requires, however, that information be considered only if it has some minimal indicium of reliability. . . . A court should refrain from comments that find no basis in the record. Nonetheless, the mere reference to information outside of the record does not require a sentence to be set aside unless the defendant shows: (1) that the information was materially false or unreliable; and (2) that the trial court substantially relied on the information in determining the sentence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2000 Conn. Super. Ct. 11717 - State v. Kirsch, No. Cr98-0178336 (Sep. 11, 2000)

2. “Generally, due process does not require that information considered by the trial judge prior to sentencing meet the same high procedural CT Page 11720 standard as evidence introduced at trial. Rather, judges may consider a wide variety of information.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2000 Conn. Super. Ct. 11717 - State v. Kirsch, No. Cr98-0178336 (Sep. 11, 2000)

3. “Consistent with due process the trial Court may consider responsible unsworn or out-of-court information relative to the circumstances of the crime and to the convicted person's life and circumstances.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2000 Conn. Super. Ct. 11717 - State v. Kirsch, No. Cr98-0178336 (Sep. 11, 2000)