People v. Moore’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “' in the statutory language governing assessments, which 'sent the Sierra ... court[ ] on [its] ... mission[ ] to decide whether the ... drug program fee[ ] [was] somehow punitive, or rather an administrative reimbursement.' [Citation.] Moore believed that mission 'amounted to a fool's errand' because of the imprecision of the language used to characterize various fines and fees in the relevant statutes. [Citation.]”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. People v. Webb · 219 Cal. Rptr. 3d 90 - People v. Moore

2. “'Total fine or forfeiture' means the total sum to be collected upon a conviction, or the total amount of bail forfeited or deposited as cash bail subject to forfeiture. It may include, but is not limited to, the following components ...: [¶] (1) The 'base fine' upon which the state penalty [assessment] and additional county penalty is calculated. [¶] (2) The 'county penalty' required by Section 76000 of the Government Code. [¶] (3) The 'DNA penalty' required by Sections 76104.6 and 76104.7 of the Government Code. [¶] (4) The 'emergency medical services penalty' authorized by Section 76000.5 of the Government Code. [¶] (5) The 'service charge' permitted by Section 853.7 of the Penal Code and Section 40508.5 of the Vehicle Code. [¶] (6) The 'special penalty' dedicated for blood alcohol analysis, alcohol program services, traumatic brain injury research, and similar purposes. [¶] (7) The 'state penalty' required by Section 1464.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 219 Cal. Rptr. 3d 90 - People v. Moore

3. “[t]he inclusion of these drug lab and drug program fees into the base fine, and then the subsequent improper levy of penalty assessments upon a fee that is not part of the 'base fine' upon which such penalty assessments must be calculated according to Penal Code section 1463, subdivision ( l )(1) is patent error. The statutes mandate that these two fees be added to the 'total fine,' after that figure has been calculated (or if you like, taxed up) by adding the appropriate penalty assessments and surcharges to the 'base fine.' " ( Moore , supra , 236 Cal.App.4th at pp. Supp. 17-18, 187 Cal.Rptr.3d 132 .) We are not persuaded. Penal Code section 1463, subdivision ( l )(1)'s, reference to "base fine”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 219 Cal. Rptr. 3d 90 - People v. Moore