Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 41 CAL2D 279 - People v. Logan

People v. Logan’s Empirical Analysis

1953

Citation profile

141
cited by 141 later decisions
5
states following
October 2016
most recently cited

139 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 141 later decisions — most recently October 2016 · most notably Neal v. State of California (1960), 58 Cal. 2d 748 - People v. McFarland (1962)

139 state decisions

6201953196019701980199020002010decided

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 35 Cal. 2d 175 - People v. Knowles · 30 Cal. 2d 589 - People v. Greer · 20 Cal. 2d 306 - People v. Hoyt · 32 Cal. 2d 491 - People v. Dabb · People v. McKenna

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

  1. “one act of inflicting force with the bat cannot both be punished as assault with a deadly weapon and availed of by the People as the force necessary to constitute the crime of robbery.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““In the absence of a showing of bad faith it is always within the scope of legitimate cross-examination to ask a character witness whether he has heard the person whose reputation is under investigation accused of conduct inconsistent with the character attributed to him by the witness.” (See also People v. Gin Shue, 58 Cal.App.2d 625 [ 137 P.2d 742 ]; People v. Burwell, 44 Cal.2d 16 [ 279 P.2d 744 ]; People v. Sieber, 201 Cal. 341, 356 [ 257 P. 64 ].)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “it is not apparent how the jury would be aided in solving the facts of the case by pictures showing defendant in the presence of the victim. ... [The several relevant matters pictured together] could have been shown without the graphic connection of defendant and the victim which resulted from photographing them together”
    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.