Baxter v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 state decisions

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

1. “In order to warrant exclusion of evidence of the identification, the identification procedure must have been so suggestive, and the witness' unassisted ability to make the identification so weak, that it may reasonably be said that the witness has lost or abandoned his or her mental image of the offender and has adopted the identity suggested. 355 So.2d at 1238 .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 717 So. 2d 1057 - Johnson v. State · 362 So. 2d 324 - State v. Sepulvado

2. “The degree of danger of misidentification required for exclusion of the evidence is appropriately high so as not to deprive the jury of evidence which is reliable despite the somewhat suggestive procedure and so as to preserve the jury's function to weigh the evidence. Once threshold reliability is established, the accused may employ the traditional methods for testing the weight which the jury should attach to the evidence. The accused may use cross-examination, impeachment, rebuttal testimony, and closing argument to persuade the jury that the identification was mistaken. 355 So.2d at 1237-38 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 362 So. 2d 324 - State v. Sepulvado

3. “it is the danger of misidentification, rather than the mere occasion of suggestion, that constitutes basis for exclusion of the identification evidence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Pendergrass