Dickerson v. Fogg’s Empirical Analysis
692 F.2d 238 · 1982
Citation profile
18 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently June 2025 · most notably United States v. Maldonado-Rivera (1990), Graham v. Solem (1984)
18 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Simmons v. United States · Neil v. Biggers · Stovall v. Denno · Manson v. Brathwaite
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]hether eyewitness identification evidence which ensues from a pre-trial identification procedure is constitutionally infirm requires a two-step inquiry. First, it must be determined whether the pre-trial identification procedures were unduly suggestive. . . . If so, then the suggestiveness of the identification procedures must be balanced against factors indicating that the in-court identification was independently reliable.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the opportunity of the witness to view [or hear] the criminal at the time of the crime, the witness' degree of attention, the accuracy of his prior description of the criminal, the level of certainty demonstrated at the confrontation, and the time between the crime and the confrontation.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Clay v. Vose · Jackson v. State“factors indicating that the in-court identification was independently reliable,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Jackson v. State · Sims v. Sullivan
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.