Leroy Boone v. E. L. Paderick, Superintendent of the Virginia State Penitentiary’s Empirical Analysis
541 F.2d 447 · 1976
Citation profile
39 federal appellate · 1 district · 14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 86 later decisions — most recently August 2022 · most notably United States v. Winter (1981), United States v. Anderson (1978)
39 federal appellate · 1 district · 14 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 Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Agurs · Giglio v. United States · Mooney v. Holohan · United States v. Carlton E. Bryant, United States of America v. William E. Turner
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 86 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“ ‘[t]he more uncertain the agreement, the greater the incentive to make the testimony pleasing to the promisor.’ ”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“*-465 Nor is the effect of the nondisclosure neutralized because the prosecuting attorney was not shown to have had knowledge of the exculpatory evidence. Failure of the police to reveal such material evidence in their possession is equally harmful to a defendant whether the information is purposefully, or negligently, withheld. And it makes no difference if the withholding is by officials other than the prosecutor. The police are also part of the prosecution, and the taint on the trial is no less if they, rather than the State’s Attorney, were guilty of the nondisclosure. If the police allow the State’s Attorney to produce evidence pointing to guilt without ever informing him of other evidence in their possession which contradicts this inference, state officers are practicing deception not only on the State’s Attorney but on the court and the defendant.... The duty to disclose is that of the state, which ordinarily acts through the prosecuting attorney; but if he too is the victim of police suppression of the material information, the state’s failure is not on that account excused.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the false testimony could ... in any reasonable likelihood have affected the judgment of the jury.”
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.