149 Conn. App. 816 - State v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
2014
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently October 2024
11 state decisions
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 State v. Golding · Hooks v. Ohio · State v. Ledbetter · State v. Marquez · Illinois Investment Trust No. 92-7163 v. American Grading Co.
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A] claim of an unnecessarily suggestive pretrial identification procedure is a mixed question of law and fact.... [B]ecause the issue of the reliability of an identification involves the constitutional rights of an accused ... we are obliged to examine the record scrupulously to determine whether the facts found are adequately supported by the evidence and whether the court's ultimate inference of reliability was reasonable.... Because the inquiry into whether evidence of pretrial identification should be suppressed contemplates a series of factbound determinations, which a trial court is far better equipped than this court to make, we will not disturb the findings of the trial court as to subordinate facts unless the record reveals clear and manifest error.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[t]he absence of double-blind, sequential arrays makes a photo array unduly suggestive”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“a non-double-blind photographic array procedure, per se, is unduly suggestive.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.