Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 18 CALAPP3D 292 - People v. Groce

People v. Groce’s Empirical Analysis

1971

Citation profile

45
cited by 45 later decisions
1
states following
June 2007
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 44 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 45 later decisions — most recently June 2007 · most notably 41 Cal. 3d 505 - People v. Burgener (1986), 74 Cal. Rptr. 2d 121 - People v. Barnett (1998)

1 federal appellate · 44 state decisions

2201971198019902000decided

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 2 Cal. 3d 118 - People v. Marsden · 1 Cal. 3d 444 - People v. Hood · 25 Cal. 2d 177 - People v. McCoy · 228 Cal. App. 2d 707 - People v. Morrison · 268 Cal. App. 2d 34 - People v. Cooper

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

  1. “It is recognized that the objection is frequently made to the inadequacy of counsel. This objection seldom has merit because the decision of the attorney is normally made after due consideration on the trial tactics to pursue in the interest of his client. The court's inquiry, of course, is not to ascertain defense counsel's reasons for his decision for not following procedure requested by the defendant. The inquiry should be limited to whether the attorney made a knowledgeable election on the subject.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “specific important instances of alleged inadequacy of [counsel's] representation”
    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.