Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 12 CAL2D 639 - People v. David

People v. David’s Empirical Analysis

1939

Citation profile

115
cited by 115 later decisions
4
states following
May 2019
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 2 district · 110 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 115 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably 16 Cal. 3d 282 - People v. Duran (1976), 28 Cal. 2d 306 - People v. Peete (1946)

3 federal appellate · 2 district · 110 state decisions

390193919401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 People v. Willard · People v. Harrington · People v. Craig · People v. Sloper · People v. Romer

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 115 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “"In this state the testimony of a witness may be impeached by proof that he has suffered the prior conviction of a felony. Code Civ.Proc., § 2051. This rule applies to a defendant who testifies in his own behalf in a criminal trial notwithstanding the fact that such evidence tends to prejudice him in the eyes of the jury. * * * The nature of the crime or crimes of which he was convicted is a proper subject of inquiry in establishing the fact of his conviction. * * * But details and circumstances comprising the prior offenses are not admissible. * * *" People v. David, 12 Cal.2d 639 , 86 P.2d 811 , at page 814.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “as the defendant took his seat inside the rail one of the deputy sheriff's drew up a chair immediately behind him. Counsel for the defendant moved to discharge the panel upon the ground that the conduct of the deputy sheriff had created prejudice in the minds of the prospective jurors. The court requested the deputy to move back to the rail and denied the defendant's motion.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “the testimony of a witness may be impeached by proof that he has suffered the prior conviction of a felony,”
    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.