State v. Patrick’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
February 2002
most recently cited
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Manson v. Brathwaite · State v. Dorthey · 384 So. 2d 355 - State v. Bonanno · 433 So. 2d 688 - 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“One-on-one confrontations between a suspect and a victim, while not favored by the law, are permissible when justified by the overall circumstances. Such identification procedures are generally permitted where the accused is apprehended within a short time after the commission of the offense and is returned to the scene of the crime for on-the-spot identification or when identification is made shortly after the commission of the crime. State v. Dauzat, 364 So.2d 1000 (La.1978); State v. Patrick, 31,380 (La.App.2d Cir.10/28/98), 721 So.2d 94 , writ denied, 98-2957 (La.3/19/99), 739 So.2d 780 ; State v. Cotton, 511 So.2d 1207 (La.App. 2d Cir. 1987). Such prompt identification, under appropriate circumstances, promotes accuracy as well as expediting the release of innocent suspects. State v. Williams, 420 So.2d 1116 (La.1982); State v. Bickham, 404 So.2d 929 (La. 1981); State v. Patrick, supra ; State v. Cotton, supra .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“1) The witness's opportunity to view the criminal at the time of the crime; 2) The degree of attention paid by the witness during the commission of the crime; 3) The accuracy of any prior description; 4) The level of certainty demonstrated at confrontation; and 5) The time between the crime and the confrontation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Ball“the taking of anything of value belonging to another from the person of another, or that is in the immediate control of another, by use of force or intimidation, when the offender leads the victim to reasonably believe he is armed with a dangerous weapon.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Ball
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.