Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 233 CALRPTR3D 515 - People v. Soto

People v. Soto’s Empirical Analysis

2018

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
March 2020
most recently cited

7 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Anders v. California · 25 Cal. 3d 436 - People v. Wende · 14 Cal. 4th 1005 - People v. Bradford · 19 Cal. 4th 686 - People v. Ortega · 2 Cal. 5th 858 - People v. Gonzales

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

  1. “had occasion to consider Proposition 47 eligibility for what we will call a pure 'theft-plus' offense, i.e., one that is not identified as grand theft and requires additional necessary elements beyond the theft itself. Nothing in Romanowski or Page suggests that section 490.2 extends to any course of conduct that happens to include obtaining property by theft worth less than $ 950.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Every person who willfully obtains personal identifying information, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 530.55, of another person, and uses that information for any unlawful purpose, including to obtain, or attempt to obtain, credit, goods, services, real property, or medical information without the consent of that person, is guilty of a public offense.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “An overexpansive reading of Romanowski and Page might construe that 'theft-plus' offense as petty theft under section 490.2. Such a construction would thwart Proposition 47's objective to reduce sentences for nonviolent crimes while shifting spending toward more serious offenses.”
    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.