green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 2×
17.4 score
G Cite
cited 3× by 1 distinct case ·
“Minnesota v. Philip Morris ”
Treatment trajectory · 1998 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1998
2012
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 38 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Philip Morris USA, Inc.
minnesota v. philip morris
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
State v. Decaro
forming impressions and intuitions regarding witnesses is the quintessential jury function
cited
Cited "see"
J. B. v. C. B.
See State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57 , 80–90, 698 A.2d 739 (1997), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S. Ct. 1384 , 140 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Dabate
See State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57 , 80–90, 698 A.2d 739 (1997), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S. Ct. 1384 , 140 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Juan A. G.-P.
See State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57, 120 , 698 A.2d 739 (1997) (‘‘forming impressions and intuitions regarding witnesses is the quintessential jury function’’), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S. Ct. 1384 , 140 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Raynor
See State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57 , 80–90, 698 A.2d 739 (1997), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S. Ct. 1384 , 140 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Hargett
See State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57 , 698 A.2d 739 (1997), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S. Ct. 1384 , 140 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Patel
See footnote 31 of this opinion. 2 See State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57 , 698 A.2d 739 (1997), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S. Ct. 1384 , 140 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Patel
See footnote 31 of this opinion. 2 See State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57 , 698 A.2d 739 (1997), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S. Ct. 1384 , 140 L.
cited
Cited "see"
Demaria v. City of Bridgeport
See State v. Porter , 241 Conn. 57 , 698 A.2d 739 (1997), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S. Ct. 1384 , 140 L.Ed. 2d 645 (1998).
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Rogers
See State v. Porter , 241 Conn. 57 , 698 A.2d 739 (1997) (en banc), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S.Ct. 1384 , 140 L.Ed. 2d 645 (1998).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Jackson
(2×)
See State v. Porter , 241 Conn. 57 , 698 A.2d 739 (1997), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S.Ct. 1384 , 140 L.Ed. 2d 645 (1998).Following our Supreme Court's decision in State v. Edwards , 325 Conn. 97 , 156 A.3d 506 (2017), the defendant filed a supplemental brief setting forth this claim.
discussed
Cited "see"
Bennett v. Commissioner of Correction
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See State v. Porter , 241 Conn. 57 , 80-90, 698 A.2d 739 (1997), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S.Ct. 1384 , 140 L.Ed. 2d 645 (1998).
cited
Cited "see"
Weaving v. Commissioner of Correction
See State v. Porter , 241 Conn. 57 , 698 A.2d 739 (1997), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S.Ct. 1384 , 140 L.Ed.2d 645 (1998).
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Steele
See State v. Porter , 241 Conn. 57 , 698 A.2d 739 (1997), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S.Ct. 1384 , 140 L.Ed.2d 645 (1998).
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Rivera
See State v. Porter , 241 Conn. 57 , 698 A.2d 739 (1997) (en banc), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S.Ct. 1384 , 140 L.Ed.2d 645 (1998).
discussed
Cited "see"
Modaffari v. Greenwich Hospital
See State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57 , 93–94, 698 A.2d 739 (1997) (concluding polygraph evidence is per se inad- missible in Connecticut courts where rules of evidence apply), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S. Ct. 1384 , 140 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Collin
See State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57 , 80–90, 698 A.2d 739 (1997), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S. Ct. 1384 , 140 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Martinez
See State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57 , 698 A.2d 739 (1997) (en banc), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S. Ct. 1384 , 140 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Coccomo
(2×)
The dissent specifically contends that the defendant preserved her claim when she filed her motion for a Porter hearing; see State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57 , 698 A.2d 739 (1997), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S.Ct. 1384 , 140 L.Ed.2d 645 (1998); challenging the admission of the blood test results on chain of custody grounds, and when she subsequently appealed to the Appellate Court from the trial court's decision to admit those results.
cited
Cited "see"
Har v. Boreiko
See State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57 , 698 A.2d 739 (1997) (en banc), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S. Ct. 1384 , 140 L.
examined
Cited "see"
State v. Marquez
(4×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57, 94-95 , 698 A.2d 739 (1997), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S.Ct. 1384 , 140 L.Ed.2d 645 (1998).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Johnson
See State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57, 120 , 698 A.2d 739 (1997) (“forming impressions and intuitions regarding witnesses is the quintessential jury function”), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S. Ct. 1384 , 140 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. WILLIAM C.
See State v. Necaise, 97 Conn. App. 214 , 232 n.14, 904 A.2d 245 , cert. denied, 280 Conn. 942 , 912 A.2d 478 (2006). 12 With respect to the polygraph test, “polygraph evidence [is] per se inadmissible in all trial court proceedings in which the rules of evidence apply, and for all trial purposes, in Connecticut courts.” State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57, 94 , 698 A.2d 739 (1997) (en banc), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S. Ct. 1384 , 140 L.
cited
Cited "see"
Viera v. Cohen
See State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57 , 698 A.2d 739 (1997), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S. Ct. 1384 , 140 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. THEOFERLIUS D.
See State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57, 93-94 , 698 A.2d 739 (1997) (en banc), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S. Ct. 1384 , 140 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Antonio A.
See State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57, 93-94 , 698 A.2d 739 (1997) (en banc), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S. Ct. 1384 , 140 L.
cited
Cited "see"
Towbin v. Board of Examiners of Psychologists
See State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57, 61 , 698 A.2d 739 (1997), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S. Ct. 1384 , 140 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Morgan
See State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57, 133-34 , 698 A.2d 739 (1997), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S. Ct. 1384 , 140 L.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Philip Morris Inc.
See Philip Morris, Inc. v. Minnesota, 523 U.S. 1056 , 118 S.Ct. 1384 , 140 L.Ed.2d 643 (1998).
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Faraday
See State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57, 59 , 698 A.2d 739 (1997) (en banc), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S. Ct. 1384 , 140 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Lomax
See State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57 , 133 n.77, 698 A.2d 739 (1997), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S. Ct. 1384 , 140 L.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Mejia
See Mejia v. United States, — U.S.-, 118 S.Ct. 1384 , 140 L.Ed.2d 643 (1998).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Brandon
See, e.g., State v. Victor O., 301 Conn. 163, 174 , 20 A.3d 669 (‘‘[r]ecognizing the indefiniteness inherent in applying [the] multifactor approach [under the test set forth in State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57 , 698 A.2d 739 (1997), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S. Ct. 1384 , 140 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Landmark Investment Group, LLC v. CALCO Construction & Development Co.
See, e.g., State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57, 83 , 698 A.2d 739 (1997) (‘‘[o]nce the methodology underlying an expert conclusion has been sufficiently established, the mere fact that controversy . . . surrounds [the expert’s] conclusion goes only to the weight, and not to the admissibility, of such testimony’’), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S. Ct. 1384 , 140 L.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Lapointe v. Commissioner of Correction
See, e.g., State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57, 74 , 698 A.2d 739 (1997), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S. Ct. 1384 , 140 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Campbell
Generally, expert testimony is admissible if (1) the witness has a special skill or knowledge directly applicable to a matter in issue, (2) that skill or knowledge is not common to the average person, and (3) the testimony would be helpful to the court or jury in considering the issues.” (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Iban C., 275 Conn. 624, 634 , 881 A.2d 1005 (2005); see also Conn. Code Evid. § 7-2 (“[a] witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, education or otherwise may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise conc…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State of Connecticut v. Hall
The defendant acknowledges that the state is no longer required to adduce evidence to satisfy the *55 first prong for the horizontal gaze nystagmus test; see State v. Commins, 83 Conn. App. 496, 503-505 , 850 A.2d 1074 (2004), aff'd, 276 Conn. 503 , 886 A.2d 824 (2005); see also State v. Balbi, supra, 576-77 (concluding that determination in Commins that horizontal gaze nystagmus evidence satisfied requirements of State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57 , 698 A.2d 739 (1997) (en banc), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1058 , 118 S. Ct. 1384 , 140 L.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Remeta
v.
Stovall, Attorney General of Kansas
v.
Stovall, Attorney General of Kansas
No. 97-8493 (A-721).
Supreme Court of the United States.
Mar 30, 1998.
C. A. 10th Cir. Application for stay of execution of sentence of death, presented to Justice Breyer, and by him referred to the Court, denied. Certiorari denied.