Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 245 Ga. App. 225 - Roman v. State

245 Ga. App. 225 - Roman v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
July 2009
most recently cited

5 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Kirby v. Illinois · Jones v. State · 178 Ga. App. 581 - Williams v. State · Cooper 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “In determining whether a due process violation occurred in the conduct of the pretrial confrontation between the eyewitness and the appellant, the test is whether the identification procedure was so impermissibly suggestive as to give rise to a very substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification. In this determination, the following factors will be considered: (a) opportunity to view the defendant at the time of the offense ...; (b) the witness’ degree of attention ...; (c) the accuracy of the witness’ prior description...; (d) the level of certainty demonstrated ...; and (e) the length of time between the crime and the identification.”
    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.