Thigpen v. Cory’s Empirical Analysis
804 F.2d 893 · 1986
Citation profile
30 federal appellate · 3 district · 10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 86 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2016 · most notably State v. Waddy (1992), Perry v. New Hampshire (2012)
30 federal appellate · 3 district · 10 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 · Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · United States v. Wade · Simmons v. United States · Neil v. Biggers
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 86 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he factors to be considered in evaluating the likelihood of misidentification include the opportunity of the witness to view the criminal at the time of the crime, the witness’ degree of attention, the accuracy of the witness’ prior description of the cximinal, the level of certainty demonstrated by the witness at the confrontation, and the length of time between the crime and the confrontation.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A conviction based on identification testimony following pretrial identification violates the defendant's constitutional right to due process whenever the pretrial identification procedure is so 'impermissibly suggestive as to give rise to a very substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[O]nly the effects of, rather than the causes for, preidentification encounters should be determinative of whether the confrontations were unduly suggestive.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.