33 Cal. 4th 294 - People v. Arnold’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 federal appellate · 36 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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “two statutes forced the sentencing court to choose between sentencing the defendant to state prison or imposing no additional jail time as a condition of reinstatement of probation-because applying custody credit for the earlier one year of county jail time against the new county jail term would result in the defendant's having already served the maximum one-year county jail term permitted under section 19.2 for the new violation.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 230 Cal. Rptr. 3d 32 - People v. Arevalo

2. “[t]he better practice is for sentencing courts to expressly admonish defendants who waive custody credits under Johnson ... that such waivers will apply to any future prison term should probation ultimately be revoked and a state prison sentence imposed[,] ... [a] sentencing court's failure to include such an explicit advisement [alone] will not ... invalidate a Johnson waiver.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 230 Cal. Rptr. 3d 32 - People v. Arevalo

3. “the interplay of section 19.2's long-standing one-year cap on the time that can be served in county jail as a condition of probation for any single [offense or probation violation], and the [1976] amendment of section 2900.5, requiring that all local jail time served be credited against any subsequent county jail term imposed as a condition of reinstatement of probation.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 230 Cal. Rptr. 3d 32 - People v. Arevalo