Comments on: Superficial analysis of CT Supreme Court decisions

By: It’s criminal!: an analysis of CT Supreme Ct opinions | a public defender

Tue, 20 Apr 2010 02:54:43 +0000

[...] long years ago, on a bored Saturday afternoon, spurred by my (now missing) muse Miranda, I wrote this post which superficially analyzed Connecticut Supreme Court decisions. The analysis was pretty limited: [...]

By: SaucyVixen

SaucyVixen — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 01:27:27 +0000

Thanks for that tidbit.

I feel much better now.

By: Gideon

Gideon — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 00:50:45 +0000

I might do that next weekend. I toyed with that idea, but by the time I got done with this analysis, I was bored.

Another tidbit, though:

Justice Katz wrote the only dissent of the whole period. Just one dissent in 49 cases.

Only two concurrences in 49 cases. That’s it.

So 46 decisions with one opinion. 48 of them where all the judges agreed on the outcome. Incredible.

By: SaucyVixen

SaucyVixen — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 13:28:36 +0000

You wrote: “What might be really interesting, however, is the percentage of times the state is granted certification as opposed to the defendant. I suspect one number is rather high and the other quite low. I’m not going to do that, however, because that’s just too tedious.”

Right. Because your analysis clearly wasn’t tedious at all. I mean… Hell, Gid, if you’re gonna be a legal nerd, you may as well go all in.