People v. Quilon’s Empirical Analysis
1966
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 52 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently December 1982 · most notably Louis D. Ponce v. Walter E. Craven, Warden (1969), People v. Thompson (1967)
2 federal appellate · 52 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 People v. Maddox · People v. Reeves · People v. Gallegos · People v. Denne · Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes v. United States
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ 1. A parolee does not stand discharged from prison, but merely serves the remainder of his sentence outside rather than within the prison walls. He is at all times in custodia legis and his physical apprehension by a parole officer is not an arrest. A search of his premises is not to be tested by the rules which apply to citizens who are possessed of full civil rights. (People v. Denne, 141 Cal. App. 2d 499 [ 297 P. 2d 451 ]; People v. Triche, 148 Cal. App. 2d 198, 202-203 [ 306 P. 2d 616 ]; People v. Robarge, 151 Cal. App. 2d 660, 665-666 [ 312 P. 2d 70 ]; People v. Hernandez, 229 Cal. App. 2d 143, 150 [ 40 Cal. Rptr. 100 ].) “ 2. A parole officer needs neither a search warrant nor consent of a parolee in order to search the latter’s premises. (People v. Denne, supra; People v. Triche, supra; People v. Contreras, 154 Cal. App. 2d 321 [ 315 P. 2d 916 ]; People v. Gastelum, 237 Cal. App. 2d 205, 208-209 [ 46 Cal. Rptr. 743 ].) Nor does the requirement of reasonable or probable cause apply to a search conducted by the parolee’s supervisor. (People v. Hernandez, supra, pp. 150-151 .) “ 3. The fact that a person is on parole does not in itself justify search by peace officers other than parole officers. (People v. Gallegos, 62 Cal. 2d 176 [ 41 Cal. Rptr. 590 , 397 P. 2d 174 ].) “ 4. But when a parole officer is justified in making a search, he may have the assistance of ordinary peace officers. (People v. Contreras, supra; People v. Triche, supra; People v. Hernandez, supra.) ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““‘[C] onstitutionally proscribed trickery is that in which an officer obtains entry by subterfuge to a place where he has no right to be. Stratagem in itself is not illegal; it may be used, for example, to gain entry in order to effect a lawful arrest.’ ” 8”
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.