Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 45 Cal. 3d 1189 - People v. Bunyard

45 Cal. 3d 1189 - People v. Bunyard’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

203
cited by 203 later decisions
4
states following
April 2021
most recently cited

201 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 203 later decisions — most recently April 2021 · most notably 8 Cal. 4th 1060 - People v. Rodrigues (1994), 14 Cal. 4th 668 - People v. Mayfield (1997)

201 state decisions

82019881990200020102020decided

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

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1114

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Jackson v. Virginia · Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Chapman v. State of California · Griffin v. California

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

  1. “It need not corroborate every fact to which the accomplice testified or establish the corpus delicti, but is sufficient if it tends to connect the defendant with the crime in such a way as to satisfy the jury that the accomplice is telling the truth.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[t]he omission [i.e., of an oral admissions cautionary instruction] does not constitute reversible error if upon a reweighing of the evidence it does not appear reasonably probable that a result more favorable to defendant would have been reached in the absence of the error. [Citations.]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “the application of the multiple-murder special circumstance, to the crimes of killing a pregnant woman and her fetus [does not constitute] a disproportionate penalty violating the state and federal Constitutions”). 16 . This provision also declares that a person includes”
    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.