Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 112 R.I. 340 - State v. Ragonesi

State v. Ragonesi’s Empirical Analysis

1973

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
1
states following
February 1992
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 27 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently February 1992 · most notably State v. Porraro (1979), State v. Cianci (1981)

2 federal appellate · 27 state decisions

150197319801990decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Chapman v. State of California · United States v. Wade · Simmons v. United States · Stovall v. Denno · Gilbert v. California

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

  1. ““Where the prosecution intends to offer only an in-court identification, the defense may challenge its admissibility. The court should then, on facts elicited outside the presence of the jury, rule upon whether a pre-trial identification by the same eyewitness is violative of due process or the right to counsel. If a violation is found, the court should then decide whether the in-court identification is still admissible because it has an independent source; indeed, it would appear in the interest of expeditious judicial administration for .such a ruling to be made in any event.” Clemons v. United States, 408 F.2d 1230, 1237 (D.C. Cir. 1968), cert. denied, 394 U.S. 964 , 89 S.Ct. 1318 , 22 L.Ed.2d 567 (1969).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.