People v. Pepper’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently March 2017
21 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 California v. Green · Patterson v. United States · Romano v. United States · Infelice v. United States · 74 Wis. 2d 425 - State v. Lenarchick
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A person is legally accountable as principal for the behavior of another constituting a criminal offense if, with the intent to promote or facilitate the commission of the offense, he aids, abets, or advises the other person in planning or committing the offense.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Baker v. State · People v. Thompson“"(1) Where a witness in a criminal trial has made a previous statement inconsistent with his testimony at the trial, the previous inconsistent statement may be shown by any otherwise competent evidence and is admissible not only for the purpose of impeaching the testimony of the witness, but also for the purpose of establishing a fact to which his testimony and the inconsistent statement relate, if: (a) The witness, while testifying, was given an opportunity to explain or deny the statement, or the witness is still available to give further testimony in the trial; and (b) The previous inconsistent statement purports to relate to a matter within the witness's own knowledge."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““We hold that under section 18-1-603, as before, one charged as a principal may be tried and convicted as a complicitor. People v. Schiedt, 182 Colo. 374 , 513 P.2d 446 ; Fernandez v. People, 176 Colo. 346 , 490 P.2d 690 . The district court did not err in instructing the jury that the defendant could be convicted as a complicitor.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. People v. Mason
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.