State v. Burch’s Empirical Analysis
1969
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 124 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 126 later decisions — most recently April 2014 · most notably State v. Caron (1974), State v. Mastrian (1969)
2 federal appellate · 124 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 Aguilar v. Texas · Simmons v. United States · Stovall v. Denno · Spinelli v. United States · Johnson v. United States
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 126 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) The opportunity of the witness to see the defendant at the time the crime was committed; (2) The length of time the person committing the crime was in the witness view; (3) The stress the witness was under at the time; (4) The lapse of time between the crime and identification; and (5) The effect of the procedures followed by the police, either testing identification or simply reinforcing the witness initial determination that the defendant committed the crime.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Hicks · State v. Armstrong“We have said that a verdict may be based on the testimony of a single witness no matter what the issue, Benson v. North-land Transp. Co., 200 Minn. 445, 450 , 274 N.W. 532, 534 [1937], and that identification testimony need not be positive and certain, but that it is enough for a witness to testify that it is his opinion, belief, impression, or judgment that the defendant is the person he saw commit the crime. State v. Sutton, 272 Minn. 399 , 138 N.W.2d 46 [1965]. The factors affecting the reliability of eyewitness testimony to which defendant refers— time for observation, circumstances under which the observation was made, etc. —go to the weight to be accorded the testimony, not its admissibility.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Caldwell v. State“«* * * where a defendant is present in a court having jurisdiction over the offense with which he is charged, has entered a plea, and is defending on the merits, we believe it wholly illogical to say that the court lacks jurisdiction to determine his guilt or innocence solely because there was a defect in the procedure under which he was initially brought into court.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Mastrian
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.