3 Ohio App. 3d 321 - State v. Sims’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 29 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently February 2025 · most notably State v. Broom (1988), State v. Buell (1986)
3 federal appellate · 29 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 Doyle v. Ohio · Jenkins v. Anderson · Williams v. Florida · Raffel v. United States · 38 Cal. App. 3d 1 - People v. Johnson
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““* * * This information, however, is irrelevant to the issue of the guilt of the accused in the case at bar, because there are no statistics on the probability of misidentification by eyewitnesses in cases which are strong enough to be brought to trial. Even if such statistics were available, this court is not persuaded that such information would assist the trier of fact to assess the credibility of the witnesses in the particular case before it.” (Emphasis added.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Buell““The expert testimony of an experimental psychologist concerning the statistical likelihood of eyewitnesses to observe and recall accurately the details of a crime is not admissible, on the ground that such testimony does not assist the trier of fact to determine the facts in the case before it. * *”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Buell““The appellant cites no authority which stands for the proposition that expert testimony is admissible on the issue of the ability of a mentally healthy witness of normal intelligence to accurately observe and recall the details of a crime.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Buell
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.