745 F. Supp. 874 - Mitchell v. Hoke’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently February 2012
2 federal appellate · 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
Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Johnson v. Zerbst · Ohio v. Roberts · Pointer v. Texas · California v. Green
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Q Detective, I would ask that you look at [a photograph of the lineup] ... I asked you who it was that viewed that particular line-up? A Elliot Primus. Q And can you tell me who was in position number four in that line-up? A Vincent Mitchell. Q And Detective, did Mr. Primus pick anyone out of that line-up? [Defense Counsel]: Objection, Judge. Just what we discussed in the chambers. The Court: He can answer that yes or no. [Defense Counsel]: Very well, Judge. The Court: Exception noted. A Yes, he did. Q And pursuant to that did you effect an arrest, Officer? A Yes, I did. Q And who [sic] did you arrest? A Vincent Mitchell.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Mitchell v. Hoke
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.