United States v. Sutherland’s Empirical Analysis
428 F.2d 1152 · 1970
Citation profile
142 federal appellate · 1 district · 24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 185 later decisions — most recently August 2008 · most notably United States v. Bell (1972), United States v. L'Hoste (1980)
142 federal appellate · 1 district · 24 state decisions — followed in 10 states
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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2113 · 18 U.S.C. § 3502 · 18 U.S.C. § 371
Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · Bruton v. United States · Simmons v. United States · Commonwealth v. Trefethen
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 185 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[F]irst, the photographic display itself must be impermissibly suggestive. Second, it must give rise to a very substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Milton · Loserth v. State“Having tried and appealed its case on one theory, an unsuccessful party may not then use a petition for rehearing as a device to test a new theory.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Prior to offering the in-court identification before the jury, the trial judge should be accorded an opportunity out of the presence of the jury to determine if the picture spread in the particular case was impermissibly suggestive either in the photographs used or the manner or number of times they are displayed. If the judge makes such a determination, he then should determine if the imper- missibly suggestive picture spread gives rise to a ‘likelihood of irrepara-gle misidentification.’ ””
3 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.