Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 684 So. 2d 74 - State v. Sterling

684 So. 2d 74 - State v. Sterling’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
1
states following
September 2012
most recently cited

14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently September 2012

14 state decisions

60199620002010decided

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 Manson v. Brathwaite · 672 So. 2d 428 - State v. Davis · 669 So. 2d 517 - State v. Guy · State v. Green · State v. Wiley

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

  1. “The defendant bears the burden of proving that an out-of-court identification itself is suggestive, and that there was a likelihood of misidentification as a result of the identification procedure. [citations omitted] An identification procedure is unduly suggestive if it focuses attention on the defendant.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Ms. Jones explained that she saw the perpetrator but not the shooting. The police did not realize that Ms. Jones was a witness because she said she did not see the shooting, and therefore the officers were in good faith when they presented the line-up to mother and daughter at the same time. Therefore, suppressing the identification will 1^not serve the purpose of deterring improper police conduct. The three month lapse between the crime and the photographic line-up is not so long as to make the identification unreliable. Detective Daniel McMullen testified that both Ms. Martin and Ms. Jones did not indicate that they were not positive or that they could not make an identification. Considering the totality of circumstances, the photographic identification, even if suggestive, nonetheless produced a reliable identification. Sterling, pp. 7, 684 So.2d at 77 .”
    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.