34 Cal. 4th 1149 - People v. Young’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 303 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 324 later decisions — most recently December 2022 · most notably 39 Cal. 4th 826 - People v. Rogers (2006), 37 Cal. 4th 310 - People v. Harris (2005)
3 federal appellate · 303 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 Jackson v. Virginia · Batson v. Kentucky · Griffin v. California · Donnelly v. DeChristoforo · Darden v. Wainwright
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 324 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'from the entire charge of the court, not from a consideration of parts of an instruction or from a particular instruction.'”
15 later decisions quote this exact passage“The appellate record in this case does not include the reporter’s transcripts of the following proceedings or conferences: defendant’s arraignment in the Alameda County Superior Court; a portion of the jury selection proceedings; a conference between the trial court and counsel during which the trial court excused Prospective Juror Heather H. by stipulation; two conferences between the trial court and counsel during which the parties agreed to excuse additional jurors by stipulation; a bench conference immediately preceding the testimony of prosecution witness Patrick Jackson; several conferences regarding jury instructions, penalty phase scheduling, and the readback of testimony; and a conversation between the trial court and the jury foreperson. The trial court conducted hearings to settle the record, but the parties were unable to fully reconstruct all of the unreported proceedings. Defendant claims the omission of these proceedings renders the record on appeal inadequate to permit meaningful appellate review. A criminal defendant is entitled under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to an appellate record that is adequate to permit meaningful review. (People v. Alvarez (1996) 14 Cal.4th 155, 196, fn. 8 , 58 Cal.Rptr.2d 385 , 926 P.2d 365 ; People v. Howard (1992) 1 Cal.4th 1132, 1166 , 5 Cal.Rptr.2d 268 , 824 P.2d 1315 (Howard)) An appellate record is inadequate “only if the complained-of deficiency is preju dicial to the defendant’s ability to prosecute his appeal.” (Al”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Young v. Gipson“1. The Attempted Murder and Robbery of Manzine Miller and the Murder of Terry Rivers In the early morning hours of January 30, 1989, Manzine Miller and Terry Rivers were selling rock cocaine in front of Miller’s house on East 24th Street in Oakland (Miller’s house). Around 2:30 a.m., Miller observed a black-over-green Ford turn onto Highland Avenue from East 24th Street and park. Moments later, defendant and another man walked from Highland Avenue and approached Miller. Defendant told Miller he wanted to purchase $50 worth of rock cocaine. Miller indicated to defendant that he could sell him the drug, but would have to get it from his supplier. Defendant told his companion to watch the street and then followed Miller along a pathway through a nearby vacant lot known as the “swamp,” towards Miller’s supplier. As they walked, defendant pulled out a gun, told Miller to get on his knees, and robbed him of the rock cocaine he had in his pocket. As Miller begged defendant not to shoot him, defendant shot him above his right hip. Miller survived the gunshot wound and watched defendant walk back towards his (Miller’s) house. Miller heard three gunshots shortly after defendant left. When the police arrived at Miller’s house, they found the body of Terry Rivers lying across the front entryway. £ Murder of Glen Frazier and Attempted Robbery ofMelva Fite Sometime after 2:00 a.m. on January 30, 1989, on 89th Avenue in Oakland, defendant exited a vehicle and approached Melva Fite and Glen ”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Young v. Gipson
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.