Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 294 F.2d 723 - Payne v. United States

Payne v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

294 F.2d 723 · 1961

Citation profile

89
cited by 89 later decisions
6
states following
May 2012
most recently cited

59 federal appellate · 2 district · 27 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 89 later decisions — most recently May 2012 · most notably Drew v. United States (1964), Gilbert v. United States (1966)

59 federal appellate · 2 district · 27 state decisions

650196119701980199020002010decided

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 Nardone v. United States · United States v. Di Re · Mallory v. United States · Frisbie v. Collins · Brownell v. Stjepan Bozo Carija

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

  1. ““The consequence of accepting appellant’s contention * * * would be that [the witness] would be forever precluded from testifying against Payne in court, merely because he had complied with the request of the police that he come to police headquarters and had there identified Payne as the robber. Such a result is unthinkable. The suppression of the testimony of the complaining witness is not the right way to control the conduct of the police, or to advance the administration of justice.””
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““As to the identification, the trial judge allowed Warren to identify Payne as he sat in the courtroom, but did not permit any reference to the identification made at police headquarters. Whether this last restriction was necessary under Mallory we need not say. However, it narrows the issue before us.” ( 294 F.2d at 726 .)”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “in certain classes of cases collateral offenses may be shown as reflecting * * * a plan or method, * * * and * * * that the accused persons committed such other offenses, and in so doing followed the same plan or method as is shown to have been followed in the commission of the crime charged in the indictment”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.