People v. Carson’s Empirical Analysis
1900
Citation profile
26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently January 1983 · most notably 62 Cal. 2d 338 - People v. Dorado (1965), 1 Cal. 3d 524 - People v. St. Martin (1970)
26 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 People v. Donnolly · People v. Finley · People v. Eldridge · People v. Van Horn · People v. Quijada
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Nothing could be accomplished by requiring a jury under such a prosecution to return a verdict of either of these lesser degrees of crime against one already serving a term of life imprisonment, because no punishment whatever could be meted out to him as a penalty on such conviction.... where a defendant is already undergoing a life sentence it would be idle, even absurd, to say that the legislature ever contemplated in a prosecution under section 246 of the Penal Code the return of verdicts upon which no possible punishment could be meted out to the defendant, and which, for all practical purposes, would be equivalent to a verdict, at least as far as any punishment thereon is concerned, of not guilty.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“. . There was sufficient evidence in the case to warrant the jury in finding that there was a conspiracy among the prisoners . . . and that the defendant was a party to it. . . . Nor was the evidence subject to a motion to strike it out on the ground that as defendant was charged in the indictment specifically with an assault . . . with ... a chisel ... he could not be convicted by proof that an assault was made by the other prisoners . . . with knives. . . . “. . . Nor is it of any consequence that the defendant was' charged with an assault with a chisel and not with a knife.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. People v. Bundte““But as he [the defendant] was charged with an assault with a weapon of specific character he could only be convicted by proof of an assault made by him with the weapon charged, and the theory of responsibility as an aider and abettor in an assault made by the other prisoners with other weapons was neither tenable nor permissible under the indictment against him. But as appellant does not make any complaint on this appeal as to this theory, ... it is unnecessary to further discuss the proposition.” (Italics added.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. People v. Bundte
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.