672 So. 2d 428 - State v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
90 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 91 later decisions — most recently April 2019 · most notably 677 So. 2d 1008 - State v. Powell (1996), 907 So. 2d 232 - State v. Adkins (2005)
90 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 Jackson v. Virginia · Neil v. Biggers · Manson v. Brathwaite · State v. Mims · State v. Smith
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 91 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A lineup is unduly suggestive if the procedure used focuses attention on the defendant. For example, distinguishing marks on the photos may single out the accused, or suggestiveness can arise if sufficient resemblance of physical characteristics and features does not reasonably test identification. State v. Tucker, 591 So.2d 1208, 1213 (La.App. 2d Cir. 1991) writ denied, 594 So.2d 1317 (La.1992), citing State v. Robinson, 386 So.2d 1374 (La.1980). Photographs used in a lineup are suggestive if they display the defendant so singularly that the witness's attention is unduly focused on the defendant. State v. Smith, 430 So.2d 31 (La.1983); State v. Tucker, supra . It is not required that each person whose photograph is used in the lineup have the exact physical characteristics as the defendant. What is required is a sufficient resemblance to reasonably test the identification. State v. Smith, supra ; State v. Davis [27,961 (La.App. 2d Cir. 4/8/96), 672 So.2d 428 , writ denied, 97-383 (La. 10/31/97), 703 So.2d 12 ].”
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.