Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 35 Cal. 3d 329 - People v. Fields

35 Cal. 3d 329 - People v. Fields’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

490
cited by 490 later decisions
11
states following
February 2019
most recently cited

22 federal appellate · 452 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 490 later decisions — most recently February 2019 · most notably 42 Cal. 3d 730 - People v. Rodriguez (1986), 41 Cal. 3d 144 - People v. Balderas (1985)

22 federal appellate · 452 state decisions — followed in 11 states

19201983199020002010decided

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 Witherspoon v. Illinois · 46 Cal. 2d 818 - People v. Watson · Taylor v. Louisiana · Duren v. Missouri · Adams v. Texas

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 490 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[The alternate] would be joining a group which has already discussed and evaluated the circumstances of the crime, the capacity of the defendant, and other issues which bear both on guilt and on penalty. The resulting deliberations between old members . . . and new members ignorant of those discussions and conclusions, would depart from the requirement that jurors "reach their consensus through deliberations which are the common experience of all of them."”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “whether the juror's views would prevent or substantially impair the performance of his duties as a juror in accordance with his instructions and his oath.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “assure-insofar as possible-that the decision-making process of a death penalty case is a coherent whole.”
    2 later decisions 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.