People v. Diaz’s Empirical Analysis
1958
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 40 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently October 1997 · most notably 46 Cal. 3d 381 - People v. Superior Court (1988), Ricks v. District of Columbia (1968)
4 federal appellate · 40 state decisions — followed in 13 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 United States v. Brewer · People v. Galpern · People v. Vetri · People v. Bell · McKinley v. Salter
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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Whenever a conviction for loitering has been upheld, it is because the statute uses the term ‘loiter’ or ‘loitering’ to point up the prohibited act, either actual or threatened. For instance, under the Penal Law loitering is deemed ‘disorderly conduct’ whenever ‘Any person * * * with intent to provoke a breach of the peace, or whereby a breach of the peace may be occasioned * * * Congregates with others on a public street and refuses to move on * * * Frequents or loiters about any public place soliciting men’ (Penal Law, § 722, subds. 3, 8). When a statute is so framed, the term ‘loiter’ or ‘loitering’ takes on significance as a prohibited act, in the violation of which a crime is deemed committed (cf. People v. Hussock, 6 Misc.2d 182 , 23 N.Y.S.2d 520 , certiorari denied 312 U.S. 659 , 61 S.Ct. 733 , 85 L.Ed. 1107 ) and convictions had thereunder have been upheld (cf. People v. Galpern, 259 N.Y. 279 , 181 N.E. 572 , 83 A.L.R. 785 ; People v. Gaskin, 306 N.Y. 837 , 118 N.E.2d 903 ).””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““It is the rule 'that for validity a criminal statute must be informative on its face (People v. Firth, 3 N.Y.2d 472 , 168 N.Y.S.2d 949 , 146 N.E.2d 682 ) and so explicit [sic] that ‘all men subject to their penalties may know what acts it is their duty to avoid’ (United States v. Brewer, 139 U.S. 278, 288 , 11 S.Ct. 538, 541 , 35 L.Ed. 190 ; People v. Vetri, 309 N.Y. 401 , 131 N.E.2d 568 ). While the term ‘loiter’ or ‘loitering’ has by long usage acquired a common and accepted meaning (People v. Bell, 306 N.Y. 110 , 115 N.E.2d 821 ), it does not follow that by itself, and without more, such term is enough to inform a citizen of its criminal implications and, by the same token, leave it open to arbitrary enforcement.””
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.