Rochin v. People of California’s Empirical Analysis
1952
Citation profile
2,425 federal appellate · 599 district · 1,638 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6,715 later decisions (257 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2025 · most notably Illinois v. Gates (1983), In the Matter of Samuel Winship (1970)
2,425 federal appellate · 599 district · 1,638 state decisions — followed in 50 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 Boyd v. United States · Snyder v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts · Palko v. State of Connecticut · Wolf v. People of the State of Colorado
Cited together with United States v. Russell · Mapp v. Ohio · Palko v. State of Connecticut · Daniels v. Williams · Wolf v. People of the State of Colorado
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 6,715 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“offend those canons of decency and fairness which express the notions of justice of English-speaking peoples even toward those charged with the most heinous offenses.”
233 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the community's sense of fair play and decency,”
34 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“* * * in reviewing a State criminal conviction under a claim of right guaranteed by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, from which is derived the most far-reaching and most frequent federal basis of challenging State criminal justice, `we must be deeply mindful of the responsibilities of the States for the enforcement of criminal laws, and exercise with due humility our merely negative function in subjecting convictions from state courts to the very narrow scrutiny which the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment authorizes.' Malinski v. New York, 324 U.S. 401 , 412, 418 [65 S.Ct. 781, 89 L.Ed. 1029]. Due process of law, `itself a historical product,' Jackman v. Rosenbaum Co., 260 U.S. 22 , 31, 43 S.Ct. 9, 67 L.Ed. 107, is not to be turned into a destructive dogma against the States in the administration of their systems of criminal justice.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.