28 Cal. 4th 682 - People v. Statum’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
116 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 119 later decisions — most recently March 2021 · most notably 31 Cal. 4th 728 - Jarrow Formulas, Inc. v. LaMarche (2003), 30 Cal. 4th 894 - Robert L. v. Superior Court (2003)
116 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 North Carolina v. Pearce · United States v. Halper · United States v. DiFrancesco · United States v. Wilson · Luce 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 119 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a]n order modifying the verdict or finding by reducing the degree of the offense or the punishment imposed or modifying the offense to a lesser offense.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“'plain language of the statute establishes what was intended by the Legislature.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“As stated above, the People may seek review by writ under section 1238, subdivision (d) when a trial court declares the wobbler offense to be a misdemeanor and grants probation, and may additionally file an appeal under section 1238, subdivision (a)(5) when the trial court declares the wobbler to be a misdemeanor after suspending the imposition of judgment and granting probation. By applying the plain meaning of the statutory language, the People will also be able to appeal when the trial court declares the wobbler to be a misdemeanor and, instead of granting probation, orders the defendant to serve time in jail or pay a fine. Neither defendant nor the dissenting opinion has explained why the Legislature would have wanted to allow an appeal in one circumstance but not the other. [Citation.]”
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.