State v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

25 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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “It is well settled that questions of relevance are committed to the sound discretion of the trial court.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Johnson v. Warden, No. Cv00-0443442 (Dec. 19, 2002) · 2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 5740 - Pierce v. Fales, No. Cv-99-0088423 S (May 3, 2002)

2. “". . . among other things, Kasperzyk did not hear the defendant attempt to fire the weapon, the defendant had fired the weapon two weeks before the incident, the hammer was resting on an empty chamber when inspected by Tchakirides, there was no recording of where the removed cartridges were positioned in the weapon and there was no way to determine when the mark was made. The defendant argued, therefore, that the firing pin impression evidence was speculative, and `the admission of such evidence unduly prejudiced the defendant.'"”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Johnson v. Warden, No. Cv00-0443442 (Dec. 19, 2002)