115 Cal. App. 4th 379 - People v. Willis’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently August 2020
2 federal appellate · 7 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 46 Cal. 2d 818 - People v. Watson · Frye v. United States · 17 Cal. 3d 24 - People v. Kelly · 29 Cal. 4th 515 - People v. Bolden · 53 Cal. 3d 1115 - People v. Jones
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“) evidence failed to meet the test for reliability of scientific techniques involving novel devices or processes. Id. at 386 . As noted by the California court, however, dog scent evidence is different from dog tracking evidence, and essentially less reliable, in that the former involves a dog being given a scent from a gauze pad some length of time after an alleged incident occurs and then being observed *Page 25 to see if the dog”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“an unambiguous alert that the person has been located.”
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.