155 Ind. App. 536 - Jones v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1973
Citation profile
8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
January 1985
most recently cited
8 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Simmons v. United States · McCulley v. State · Nelson v. State · Taylor v. State · Johnson v. State
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘Despite the hazards of initial identification by photograph, this procedure has been used widely and effectively in criminal law enforcement, from the standpoint both of apprehending offenders and of sparing innocent suspects the ignominy of arrest by allowing eyewitnesses to exonerate them through scrutiny of photographs. The danger that use of the technique may result in convictions based on misidentification may be substantially lessened by a course of cross-examination at trial which exposes to the jury the method’s potential for error. We are unwilling to prohibit its employment, either in the exercise of our supervisory power or, still less, as a matter of constitutional requirement. Instead, we hold that each case must be considered on its own facts, and that convictions based on eyewitness identification at trial following a pretrial identification by photograph will be set aside on that ground only if the photographic identification procedure was so impermissibly suggestive as to give rise to a very substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification. . . .’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““. . . We do not weigh the evidence, but in observing the photographs and considering the evidence most favorable to the State, as is our duty, we cannot, using the words of Justice Hunter in Johnson v. State (1972), [257] Ind. [634], 277 N.E.2d 791, 794 , say the pre-trial identification: ‘. . . was so impermissibly suggestive as to give rise to a very substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification.’ . . .””
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.