Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 46 CAL2D 798 - People v. Vogel

People v. Vogel’s Empirical Analysis

1956

Citation profile

215
cited by 215 later decisions
8
states following
August 2019
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 1 district · 200 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 215 later decisions — most recently August 2019 · most notably 15 Cal. 3d 143 - People v. Mayberry (1975), 61 Cal. 2d 529 - People v. Hernandez (1964)

6 federal appellate · 1 district · 200 state decisions

6801956196019701980199020002010decided

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 Mutual Life Ins Co of New York v. Hillmon · People v. Kitchens · 24 Cal. 2d 177 - People v. Alcalde · 30 Cal. 2d 746 - Heimann v. City of Los Angeles · People v. O'Brien

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

  1. ““All persons are capable of committing crimes except those belonging to the following classes: t t “Five—Persons who committed the act charged without being conscious thereof.’ ’”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “In every crime ... there must exist a union, or joint operation of act and intent, or criminal negligence.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “So basic is this requirement [of a union of act and wrongful intent] that it is an invariable element of every crime unless excluded expressly or by necessary implication.”
    2 later decisions 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.