People v. Prettyman’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
18 federal appellate · 286 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 359 later decisions — most recently August 2023 · most notably 38 Cal. 4th 491 - People v. Avila (2006), 19 Cal. 4th 353 - People v. Ochoa (1999)
18 federal appellate · 286 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 Chapman v. State of California · Estelle v. McGuire · 46 Cal. 2d 818 - People v. Watson · United States v. Gaudin · Boyde v. California
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 359 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“must find that the defendant, acting with (1) knowledge of the unlawful purpose of the perpetrator; and (2) the intent or purpose of committing, encouraging, or facilitating the commission of a predicate or target offense; (3) by act or advice aided, promoted, encouraged or instigated the commission of the target crime[;] ... [and] that (4) the defendant's confederate committed an offense other than the target crime; and (5) the offense committed by the confederate was a natural and probable consequence of the target crime that the defendant aided and abetted.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“if a person aids and abets only an intended assault, but a murder results, that person may be guilty of that murder, even if unintended, if it is a natural and probable consequence of the intended assault.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“"Before you decide whether the defendant is guilty of murder in the second degree, you must decide whether he is guilty of assault with a deadly weapon or assault with force likely to produce great bodily injury other than the crime charged in Count 2. "To prove that the defendant is guilty of murder in the second degree, the People must prove that: "1. The defendant is guilty of assault with a deadly weapon or assault with force likely to produce great bodily injury other than the crime charged in Count 2; "2. During the commission of assault with a deadly weapon or assault with force likely to produce great bodily injury, a coparticipant in that assault committed the crime of murder; "AND "3. Under all of the circumstances, a reasonable person in the defendant's position would have known that the commission of the murder was a natural and probable consequence of the commission of the assault. "A coparticipant in a crime is the perpetrator or anyone who aided and abetted the perpetrator. It does not include a victim or innocent bystander. "A natural and probable consequence is one that a reasonable person would know is likely to happen if nothing unusual intervenes. In deciding whether a consequence is natural and probable, consider all of the circumstances established by the evidence. If the murder was committed for a reason independent of the common plan to commit the assault, then the commission of murder was not a natural and probable consequence of assault. "To decide w”
2 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.