People v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis
1970
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 53 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 80 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2011 · most notably Chambers v. Mississippi (1973), State v. Gold (1980)
11 federal appellate · 53 state decisions — followed in 16 states
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 Mattox v. United States · Donnelly v. United States · People v. Spriggs · Sutter v. Easterly · 45 Cal. 2d 613 - People v. One 1948 Chevrolet Convertible Coupe
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 80 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““But whether the person is dead, or beyond the jurisdiction, or will not testify, and cannot be compelled to testify because of a constitutional privilege, all equally spell out unavailability of trial testimony. If the rule is to be changed to include penal admissions against interest, it ought to embrace unavailability because of the assertion of constitutional right which might be fairly common in the area of penal admissions.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. O'Clair“[T]he distinction which would authorize a court to receive proof that a man admitted he never had title to an Elgin watch, but not to receive proof that he had admitted striking Jones over the head with a club, assuming equal relevancy of both statements, does not readily withstand analysis. [People v. Brown, 26 N.Y.2d 88, 91 , 308 N.Y.S.2d 825, 827 , 257 N.E.2d 16, 17 (1970).]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“dead, beyond the jurisdiction and thus not available; or where he is in court and refuses to testify as to the fact of the admission on the ground of self incrimination.”
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.