Connecticut Appellate Court· 4/15/1986
State v. Murrell
Citations
- 7 Conn. App. 75
- 507 A.2d 1033
- 1986 Conn. App. LEXIS 929
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- noting absence of evidence, which, in combination with uncharged misconduct evidence, would “create the inference that these incidents were, in fact, parts of an overall plan, scheme or design”
- “concerns about acts that are remote in time are lessened where the defendant spent a significant part of that time incarcerated”
- “there is some discrepancy in the cases as to the factors governing the admissibility determination when evidence of prior misconduct is offered to prove a common scheme”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Borden
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
22 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- State v. MooneySupreme Court of Connecticut· 1991-03-19· cited 145×
- State v. SantiagoSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1992-12-29· cited 98×
- State v. SawyerSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2006-08-08· cited 94×
- State v. RandolphSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2007-11-13· cited 88×
- State v. MerriamSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2003-07-15· cited 88×
- State v. PayneSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1991-05-21· cited 62×
- State v. ColemanConnecticut Appellate Court· 1988-06-14· cited 48×
- State v. ParentConnecticut Appellate Court· 1986-08-12· cited 34×
- State v. SnelgroveSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2008-09-16· cited 32×
- State v. ColeConnecticut Appellate Court· 1986-08-19· cited 29×
- State v. HerzogCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1994-03-25· cited 27×
- State v. ServelloConnecticut Appellate Court· 1988-04-12· cited 24×
- In re Jason S.Connecticut Appellate Court· 1986-11-04· cited 20×
- State v. ScottConnecticut Appellate Court· 1987-05-26· cited 20×
- State v. SmithConnecticut Appellate Court· 1987-05-05· cited 19×
- State v. TaylorConnecticut Appellate Court· 1990-10-16· cited 18×
- State v. CarsettiConnecticut Appellate Court· 1987-09-15· cited 16×
- State v. HenryConnecticut Appellate Court· 1996-04-23· cited 12×
- State v. DearbornConnecticut Appellate Court· 2004-05-04· cited 11×
- State v. WiedlConnecticut Appellate Court· 1994-06-22· cited 6×
Cites
22 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Manson v. BrathwaiteSupreme Court· 1977-06-16· cited 5,119×
- State v. EspositoSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1984-02-07· cited 159×
- State v. NardiniSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1982-07-13· cited 114×
- State v. BramanSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1983-12-27· cited 106×
- State v. HauckSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1976-12-28· cited 99×
- State v. OnofrioSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1979-09-04· cited 97×
- State v. IbraimovSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1982-06-15· cited 86×
- State v. TropianoSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1969-09-24· cited 77×
- State v. TuckerSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1980-07-01· cited 74×
- State v. ShindellSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1985-01-29· cited 71×
- State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1983-06-28· cited 58×
- State v. BrownSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1986-03-04· cited 55×
- State v. HowardSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1982-08-03· cited 47×
- State v. PerrySupreme Court of Connecticut· 1985-03-19· cited 45×
- State v. CarrioneSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1982-12-21· cited 43×
- State v. CarterSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1986-01-21· cited 37×
- State v. ConroySupreme Court of Connecticut· 1984-12-04· cited 34×
- State v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1983-05-10· cited 31×
- Travelers Insurance v. HendricksonConnecticut Appellate Court· 1983-12-08· cited 26×
- State v. CrosbySupreme Court of Connecticut· 1985-05-07· cited 21×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.