2 Cal. 5th 1093 - People v. Martinez’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

27 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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “'as a result of the commission of a crime' "].) As was the case before the trial court and the appellate division, petitioners point to no evidence, and refer to no offer of proof that would support a finding, that the three-day failure to report was a substantial factor in causing their injuries. Petitioners offer only counsel's speculation that the losses they suffered "could have been lessened or obviated altogether”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Crump v. Superior Court of L. A. Cnty. · People v. Nuno

2. “is not the 'hitting' but the 'running.' " ' " ( Ibid. ) " ' "The legislative purpose of sections 20001 and 20003 is to prevent the driver of a vehicle involved in an injury-causing accident from leaving injured persons in distress and danger for want of medical care and from attempting to avoid possible civil or criminal liability for the accident by failing to identify oneself.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. People v. Nuno · 244 Cal. Rptr. 3d 268 - People v. Dimacali

3. “The Legislature's response, currently codified in [Penal Code] section 1202.4, similarly declares that it is the Legislature's intent 'that a victim of crime who incurs an economic loss as a result of the commission of a crime shall receive restitution directly from a defendant convicted of that crime.'”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Crump v. Superior Court of L. A. Cnty. · 244 Cal. Rptr. 3d 268 - People v. Dimacali