People v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis
2016
Citation profile
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 34 Cal. 3d 441 - People v. Dillon · 33 Cal. 3d 419 - National Audubon Society v. Superior Court · Stanislaus Water Co. v. Bachman · 182 Cal. App. 3d 82 - United States v. State Water Resources Control Board · Copeland v. Fairview Land & Water Co. & Lake Hemet Water Co.
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“While the People may prosecute defendant for transgressing the state's regulatory police power [citation], they do not provide any authority to counter the above stated principle that their ability to regulate his behavior does not create any possessory interest in the water that constitutes larceny.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“State of California makes clear that the state in its role as public trustee does not have any proprietary ownership of public waters, beyond any riparian or appropriative rights it might acquire as a property owner.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“A characterization of a state as a 'trustee' is merely a legal fiction of the 19th century expressing the state's police power over its resources.”
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.