Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 184 CONN 258 - State v. Packard

State v. Packard’s Empirical Analysis

1981

Citation profile

144
cited by 144 later decisions
6
states following
September 2018
most recently cited

143 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 144 later decisions — most recently September 2018 · most notably State v. Stepney (1983), State v. Kurvin (1982)

143 state decisions

9401981199020002010decided

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 Brady v. State of Maryland · Chapman v. State of California · United States v. Wade · Neil v. Biggers · United States v. Agurs

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

  1. “sketch, photograph, map, chart or other pictorial, graphic or schematic illustration which are not statements, but nonverbal modes of testimony.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “Since at the time of the voice-up, criminal charges had not been formally made nor had adversary judicial proceedings been initiated against the defendant, it is not necessary for us to decide whether this voice identification procedure was more similar to a lineup or to a photographic display. Under both the [United States v.] Ash [ 413 U.S. 300 , 37 L. Ed. 2d 619 , 93 S. Ct. 2568 (1973)] and Wade-Kirby rules, the sixth amendment did not grant the defendant the right to have counsel present at the time his voice was identified by the victim.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “The sketch itself . . . need not fit an exception to the rule against hearsay because it is not a “statement” and therefore can no more be “hearsay” than a photograph identified by a witness. * * * The testimony of the artist was no more necessary as a condition of admissibility than a photographer’s testimony would have been had the witnesses identified a photograph.”
    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.