Case Citator › Patterson v. New York

Patterson v. New York

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Good law
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Citation
432 U.S. 197
Decided
Confirmed treatments
0
Flagged citations read
164 of 164
Citing cases (total)
2,723
Good law
Every flagged citation to this case has been read, and none of them overrules, limits, or questions it. Patterson v. New York is good law: all 164 flagged citations have been read, and none adversely treated it. The reviewed opinions applied or distinguished Patterson's element-versus-affirmative-defense rule, discussed Patterson's treatment of other authorities, reported the history of other cases, or rejected arguments that later burden-of-proof doctrine displaced it.
More on how this was screened

Sandstrom v. Montana reaffirmed Patterson's prohibition on shifting proof of an offense element, while Apprendi v. New Jersey expressly reconciled its rule with Patterson's affirmative-defense holding. One flagged citation came from a Supreme Court order denying certiorari and supplied no treatment.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

2,723 later cases cite Patterson v. New York; 164 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Patterson v. New York?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

No reviewed court has overruled or limited this case.

Every one of the 164 flagged citations was read, and each turned out to be something other than adverse treatment: a routine application, a party's argument the court rejected, or the case itself discussing older law. That reading is the finding this page exists to report.

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Patterson v. New York and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace