Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 4 CAL2D 469 - People v. De Moss

People v. De Moss’s Empirical Analysis

1935

Citation profile

78
cited by 78 later decisions
2
states following
December 2011
most recently cited

73 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 78 later decisions — most recently December 2011 · most notably 42 Cal. 3d 730 - People v. Rodriguez (1986), 40 Cal. 2d 876 - People v. Daugherty (1953)

73 state decisions

220193519401950196019701980199020002010decided

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. Suesser · 23 Cal. App. 513 - People v. Wilson · People v. Burkhart · People v. Methever · People v. Vincent

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

  1. “a colorless recital, by way of summing up the facts.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “necessary for the proper determination of the cause”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““Intoxication, Effect of. No act committed by a person while in a state of voluntary intoxication is less criminal by reason of his having been in such condition. But, whenever the actual existence of any particular purpose, motive, or intent is a necessary element to constitute any particular species or degree of crime, the jury may take into consideration the fact that the accused was intoxicated at the time, in determining-the purpose, motive, or intent with which he committed the act.””
    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.