Anchondo v. Corrections Department’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 10 district · 48 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 63 later decisions — most recently August 2021 · most notably State v. Ogden (1994), Silva v. State (1987)
3 federal appellate · 10 district · 48 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 Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Newman Oil Co. · Methola v. County of Eddy · State v. Linam · 24 Cal. App. 3d 780 - Kimball v. County of Santa Clara · 54 Ala. App. 280 - Lowe v. State
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 63 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[L]aw enforcement officer means any full-time salaried public employee of a governmental entity whose principal duties under law are to hold in custody any person accused of a criminal offense, to maintain public order or to make arrests for crimes, or members of the national guard when called to active duty by the governor[.]”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“From looking at the statutes, we see that neither the Secretary of Corrections nor the Warden engage in any of the traditional duties of “law enforcement officers.” They do not deal directly with the daily custodial care of prison inmates. Moreover, because they do not have commissions, they have no power to make arrests or to take people into custody should a violation of the public order occur. They are merely administrative officers appointed by the governor to oversee, administer, and supervise the state’s corrections system.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“To determine whether positions are of a law enforcement nature, this court will look at the character of the principal duties involved, those duties to which employees devote the majority of their time ... This Court has looked at Section 41-4-3(D) and believes that it was the intent of the Legislature in enacting this provision to include within the definition of law enforcement officer or peace officer only those persons whose principal duties include those of a direct law enforcement nature.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.