People v. Rowe’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently July 2007 · most notably 41 Cal. 4th 872 - People v. Hoyos (2007), 18 Cal. 3d 178 - People v. Duck Wong (1976)
26 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 Jackson v. Denno · Sims v. State of Georgia · Procunier v. Atchley · People v. Schader · 6 Cal. 3d 375 - People v. Burton
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The Court: I am wondering where we’re going on voir dire. “Mr. Devitt [appellant’s lawyer]: If Your Honor please, I think we can point out the matter of the free and voluntariness and the terms and conditions. I think I’m permitted to.. “The Court: Well, come to the bench with the reporter. (The following proceedings were had at the bench:) “The Court: It is my understanding that the question of free and voluntariness is not done in the presence of the jury. “Mr. Devitt: I think, Your Honor, there is the option of the voir dire under the circumstances. I did not intend this to be — “The Court: I think that’s cross-examination. Voir dire is limited to a specific purpose. “Mr. Devitt: Well, may it please the Court, I think the question of free and voluntariness might go to the matter of physical comfort. Those things would definitely rest on it. In other words, if there was a question that these things were given under duress or hunger or fatigue, I think these matters do go into freeness and voluntariness. “The Court: I’ve never seen it done before this way. “Mr. Holmes [deputy district attorney]: I agree with the Court. Probably I should have objected when Mr. Devitt started to take the officer on voir dire. I assumed that he intended to go into the Miranda admonition or something, but even that is, I believe, purely a question of law to be determined by the Court outside the presence of the jury. “The Court: That is my understanding. “Mr. Devitt: Further, I think there is o”
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.