23 Cal. 3d 152 - In Re Rojas’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
333 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 336 later decisions — most recently August 2021 · most notably 45 Cal. 3d 727 - Lungren v. Deukmejian (1988), 30 Cal. 3d 176 - People v. Ricky H. (1981)
333 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 Merrill v. Department of Motor Vehicles · 21 Cal. 3d 562 - People v. Caudillo · 16 Cal. 3d 30 - People Ex Rel. Younger v. Superior Court · 11 Cal. 3d 542 - In Re Kapperman · 19 Cal. 3d 646 - In Re Watson
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 336 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In determining whether custody for which credit is sought under section 2900.5 is `attributable to proceedings leading to the conviction,' the sentencing court is not required to eliminate all other possible bases for the defendant's presentence incarceration. The court need only determine that the defendant was not already serving a term for an unrelated offense when restraints related to the new charge were imposed on him, and the conduct related to the new charge is a basis for those restraints. [Fn. omitted.] ... "We are satisfied that the Legislature intended that `custody ... attributable to proceedings related to the same conduct for which the defendant has been convicted' include time in presentence custody during which a restraint or restraints related to that conduct made it impossible for the defendant to obtain his freedom, regardless of whether defendant was also subject to other restraints on his liberty.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“There is no reason in law or logic to extend the protection intended to be afforded one merely charged with a crime to one already incarcerated and serving his sentence for a first offense who is then charged with a second crime. As to the latter individual the deprivation of liberty for which he seeks credit cannot be attributed to the second offense. Section 2900.5 does not authorize credit where the pending proceeding has no effect whatever upon a defendant's liberty.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“accord words their usual, ordinary, and common sense meaning based on the language the Legislature used and the evident purpose for which the statute was adopted.”
3 later decisions 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.