People v. Sepeda’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
121 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 121 later decisions — most recently June 2020 · most notably Wilson v. People (1987), People v. Garcia (2001)
121 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 Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp. · Washington v. Davis · Swain v. State of Alabama · Taylor v. Louisiana · Castaneda v. Partida
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 121 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"The ... improprieties noted above were not objected to at trial, and we have held on numerous occasions that prosecutorial misconduct in closing arguments rarely, if ever, is so egregious as to constitute plain error, within the meaning of Crim.P. 52(b), so that we may consider it on appeal absent a contemporaneous objection. See, e.g., People v. Plotner, 188 Colo. 297 , 534 P.2d 791 (1975); People v. Simbolo, 188 Colo. 49 , 532 P.2d 962 (1975). We find no misconduct so flagrant as to constitute plain error." Id. at 25, 581 P.2d 723 .”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“As has been said, one picture is worth a thousand words. ...”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Photographs of a homicide victim are admissible at trial when they depict the appearance of the victim, the location and nature of the wounds, or other facts that would be competent for a witness to describe in words.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. People v. Villalobos
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.