Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 38 CAL2D 565 - People v. Aparicio

People v. Aparicio’s Empirical Analysis

1952

Citation profile

51
cited by 51 later decisions
5
states following
May 2002
most recently cited

51 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently May 2002 · most notably 27 Cal. 4th 1041 - People v. Koontz (2002), 67 Cal. 2d 272 - People v. Laudermilk (1967)

51 state decisions

170195219601970198019902000decided

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 People v. Lindley · People v. Perry · In Re Buchanan · People v. Sloper · 25 Cal. App. 369 - People v. West

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

  1. “Penal Code, section 1368, provides: “If at any time during the pendency of an action and prior to judgment a doubt arises as to the sanity of the defendant, the court must order the question as to his sanity to be determined by a trial . . . and, from the time of such order, all proceedings in the criminal prosecution shall be suspended until the question of the sanity of the defendant has been determined...””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The duty imposed upon the trial judge by the statute [§ 1368] is not conditioned on a motion in reliance on the code provision.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “when a doubt of the defendant's sanity ... appears on the face of the record as a matter of law, an abuse of discretion is shown and the failure to order a determination of the question of sanity results in a miscarriage of justice and a reversal is required. ( People v. Vester, 135 Cal. App. 223 [ 26 P.2d 685 ]; People v. West, supra, 25 Cal. App. 369 [ 143 P. 793 ].)”
    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.