41 Cal. 3d 92 - People v. Leach’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 89 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 95 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2020 · most notably California v. Brown (1987), 52 Cal. 3d 815 - People v. Daniels (1991)
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 89 state decisions
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 Jackson v. Denno · Rogers v. Richmond · United States v. Crews · People v. Green · 34 Cal. 3d 441 - People v. Dillon
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 95 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he murder was intentional and involved the infliction of torture. For the purpose of this section torture requires proof of the infliction of extreme physical pain no matter how long its duration.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Leach contends that the trial court erred in failing to instruct sua sponte on the lesser included offense of grand theft. The trial court must instruct on the general principles of law relevant to the issues raised by the evidence even without a request. We delineated the applicable standard in People v. Wickersham (1982) 32 Cal.3d 307, 325 , 185 Cal.Rptr. 436 , 650 P.2d 311 []: `The trial court is not obligated to instruct sua sponte on necessarily included offenses unless the evidence would justify a conviction of such offense.' [¶] Leach denied taking part in the robbery. If his story was believed, he was not guilty of anything. In his version, the theftif anywas committed by Deseguirant, who took Messer”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“In sum, we find that the words used in section 190.2, subdivision (a)(18) must be understood in light of the established meaning of torture. Proof of a murder committed under the torture-murder special circumstance therefore requires proof of first degree murder, ... proof the defendant intended to kill and to torture the victim, ... and the infliction of an extremely painful act upon a living victim....”
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.