Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 13 CAL4TH 289 - People v. Fields

People v. Fields’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

145
cited by 145 later decisions
6
states following
May 2019
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 139 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 145 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably 19 Cal. 4th 686 - People v. Ortega (1998), 16 Cal. 4th 826 - People v. Monge (1997)

3 federal appellate · 139 state decisions

790199620002010decided

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 North Carolina v. Pearce · Burks v. United States · Benton v. Maryland · Brown v. Ohio · Green v. United States

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

  1. “[T]he California Constitution is a document of independent force and effect that may be interpreted in a manner more protective of defendants' rights than that extended by the federal Constitution, as construed by the United States Supreme Court.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “When the defendant is convicted or acquitted or has been once placed in jeopardy upon an accusatory pleading, the conviction, acquittal, or jeopardy is a bar to another prosecution for the offense charged in such accusatory pleading, or for an attempt to commit the same, or for an offense necessarily included therein, of which he might have been convicted under that accusatory pleading.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Underlying this principle — that a conviction of a lesser included offense is a bar to a subsequent prosecution for the greater offense — is the notion that, once a conviction on the lesser offense has been obtained, to [later] convict of the greater would be to convict twice of the lesser.”
    3 later decisions 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.