Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 539 F.2d 17 - United States v. Higginbotham

United States v. Higginbotham’s Empirical Analysis

539 F.2d 17 · 1976

Citation profile

63
cited by 63 later decisions
8
states following
January 2021
most recently cited

46 federal appellate · 9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 63 later decisions — most recently January 2021 · most notably United States v. Giese (1979), United States v. Hearst (1977)

46 federal appellate · 9 state decisions

290197619801990200020102020decided

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. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 2312

Relies on United States v. Wade · Simmons v. United States · Neil v. Biggers · Stovall v. Denno · Elkins v. United States

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

  1. “(A) witness has the choice, after weighing the advantage of the privilege against self-incrimination against the advantage of putting forward his version of the facts and his reliability as a witness, not to testify at all. He cannot reasonably claim that the Fifth Amendment gives him not only this choice but, if he elects to testify, an immunity from cross-examination on the matters he has himself put in dispute. It would make of the Fifth Amendment not only a humane safeguard against judicially coerced self-disclosure but a positive invitation to mutilate the truth a party offers to tell.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “While the repeated showing to a witness of photographic displays for the purpose of identification presents opportunities for abuse and due process problems, when it is shown that the witness was equivocal on the first selection and became firm on a later showing, that rule should not be applied where the witness has been consistently firm.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[T]he demand to produce these photographs might well be likened to an attempt to require production under the Jencks Act of statements in the possession of state police. See Beavers v. United States, 351 F.2d 507 (9th Cir.1965), where the statements were never in possession of the United States and production was not required.”
    1 later decision 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.