People v. Westfall’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

15 state decisions

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

1. ““In California any element of the corpus delicti may be established by circumstantial evidence. Indeed, the corpus delicti may be established in its entirety, that is, solely by circumstantial evidence. (People v. Scott, 176 Cal.App.2d 458 [ 1 Cal.Rptr. 600 ]; People v. Amaya, 40 Cal.2d 70, 75 [ 251 P.2d 324 ].) Many California cases hold that the corpus delicti ‘may be proved ... by inferences drawn from facts shown. ’ (People v. Hudson, 139 Cal.App. 543, 544 [ 34 P.2d 741 ]; People v. Alviso, 55 Cal. 230, 233 .) “It is equally well established that the identity of the perpetrator of the crime is never an essential element of the corpus delicti. As was said by the Supreme Court in People v. Cobb, 45 Cal.2d 158, 161 [ 287 P.2d 752 ]: “‘ All that need be shown by independent evidence before a confession may be introduced is that a crime has been committed by someone. [Citations.] Proof of the corpus delicti does not require proof of the identity of the perpetrators of the crime, nor proof that the crime was committed by the defendant. ’ “See also People v. Whitsett, 160 Cal.App.2d 652, 657 [ 325 P.2d 529 ], “Furthermore, the proof of the corpus delicti need not establish the crime beyond a reasonable doubt to warrant the introduction into evidence of confessions or extrajudicial statements of an accused. Prima facie proof of the corpus delicti is sufficient, as appears from the following excerpt from People v. Selby, 198 Cal. 426 [ 245 P. 426 ], at page 437: “ ‘It is apparent ”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 225 Cal. App. 2d 536 - People v. Huber