Ingram v. Peyton’s Empirical Analysis
367 F.2d 933 · 1966
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently October 1987 · most notably United States v. Anderson (1973), James Richard Ellis v. State of Oklahoma and Warden Ray H. Page (1970)
15 federal appellate · 8 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 Napue v. People of the State of Illinois · Hopt v. People of the Territory of Utah · Dowd v. United States Cook · Cochran v. Kansas · Barbee v. Warden, Maryland Penitentiary
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““After-discovered evidence, which is merely impeaching, cumulative or corroborating will not ordinarily invalidate a verdict, but if such evidence is of a character to raise a substantial likelihood that it would have affected the result if known at the trial, its nondisclosure cannot be ignored. It is reasonable to think that a jury, if made aware that the Commonwealth’s principal witness was a convicted perjurer, would have been disposed to discount his testimony. In the absence of adequate independent evidence, the jury might well have entertained a reasonable doubt of Ingram’s guilt.” Id, at 936-37.”
4 later decisions 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.