Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 409 So. 2d 268 - State v. Davis

409 So. 2d 268 - State v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis

1982

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
1
states following
December 1991
most recently cited

28 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Manson v. Brathwaite · 338 So. 2d 584 - State v. Crosby

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

  1. “The factors to be considered include the opportunity of the witness to view the criminal at the time of the crime, the witness' degree of attention, the accuracy of his prior description of the criminal, the level of certainty displayed at the confrontation, and the time between the crime and the confrontation. Against these factors is to be weighed the corrupting effect of the suggestive identification. The court noted that the standard, after all, is that of fairness as required by the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment. In the final analysis, it must be determined whether under all the circumstances of a particular case there is a very substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification.”
    11 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentifications.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.