Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 614 F.2d 219 - Green v. Loggins

Green v. Loggins’s Empirical Analysis

614 F.2d 219 · 1980

Citation profile

63
cited by 63 later decisions
3
cited 3 times by the Supreme Court
10
states following
January 2012
most recently cited

33 federal appellate · 1 district · 11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 63 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2012 · most notably United States v. Thevis (1982), Perry v. New Hampshire (2012)

33 federal appellate · 1 district · 11 state decisions — followed in 10 states

3901980199020002010decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Chapman v. State of California · United States v. Wade · Simmons v. United States · Neil v. Biggers · Stovall v. Denno

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. “is not the primary purpose behind judicial review of tainted identification testimony.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““a court is obligated to review every pretrial encounter, accidental or otherwise, in order to insure that the circumstances of the particular encounter have not been so suggestive as to undermine the reliability of the witness’ subsequent identification.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “opportunity to view the perpetrator at the time of the crime”
    2 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.