People v. Johnny P.’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
February 2001
most recently cited
3 state decisions
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“although defendant does not require linguistic interpretive services, his thought processes are so convoluted that only one who has both medical and forensic familiarity with them can properly communicate with defendant.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In Re JM“not limited to instances in which the failure of communication exists because of a language barrier, but extends as well to instances involving other disabilities,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In Re JM
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.