State v. Burrows’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district · 18 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “in-hand service . . . Service of a subpoena `upon' a person does not require physical acceptance of it, if the person is given notice of it and its contents. See 97 C.J.S., Witnesses 23.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 168 Conn. App. 207 - Moye v. Commissioner of Correction · Phoenix Limo. Service v. Est. of Hilchen, No. Cv000378706s (Jun. 12, 2001)

2. “The issuance of a capias is not mandatory, and lies within the discretion of the trial court.... If, however, a witness is not warranted in refusing to honor a subpoena and his absence will cause a miscarriage of justice, the court should issue a capias.... [If, however] the court never exercised any discretion because it believed its authority to do so was lacking [our review is plenary]. It is clear that the court [has] the power, if the witness had actually been served [properly with the subpoena] and refused to appear, to issue a capias.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 168 Conn. App. 207 - Moye v. Commissioner of Correction

3. “[I]f any other person upon whom a subpoena is served to appear and testify in a cause pending before any court ... fails to appear and testify, without reasonable excuse, he shall be fined ... and the court or judge, on proof of the service of a subpoena ... and the tender of such fees, may issue a capias directed to some proper officer to arrest the witness and bring him before the court to testify.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 168 Conn. App. 207 - Moye v. Commissioner of Correction