47 Cal. 3d 1194 - People v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 425 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 459 later decisions — most recently January 2022 · most notably 9 Cal. 4th 83 - People v. Crittenden (1994), 53 Cal. 3d 771 - People v. Cooper (1991)
19 federal appellate · 425 state decisions — followed in 10 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 Batson v. Kentucky · Bruton v. United States · Griffin v. California · Witherspoon v. Illinois · Wainwright v. Witt
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 459 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(1) The absence of any prior criminal activity by defendant involving the use or attempted use of force or violence or the express or implied threat to use force or violence. “(2) The absence of any prior felony conviction. “(3) The age of the defendant at the time of the crime. He was eighteen (18) years of age. “(4) Circumstances concerning the environment in which the defendant was raised, his character and background that were offered by defendant as a basis for a sentence less than death. “(5) The defendant’s expression, during the penalty phase, of guilt and remorse for his criminal acts. “The Court finds that evidence received during the trial of this case establishes the following penalty factors: “(1) The circumstances of the crimes of which defendant was convicted and the existence of two special circumstances found to be true, and which included the following: “(a) The burglary of the residence was planned in advance. “(b) The defendant armed himself before entering the house. “(c) He forced his way into the residence against resistance by the victim. “(d) Once inside the house, defendant held the victim captive at gun point. “(e) A tacit commitment was made beforehand that if anyone was at home, they would be eliminated. [Citation.] “(i) The reason for eliminating the victim was to prevent her from being a witness. [Citation.] “(g) The defendant had sufficient time to deliberate upon the course of conduct he was about to take, and within minutes after being given”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“If a party believes an opponent is improperly using peremptory challenges for a discriminatory purpose, that party must make a timely objection and a prima facie showing that the jurors are being excluded on the basis of group bias. [Citation.] To establish a prima facie case, the moving party should first make as complete a record as possible; second, the moving party must establish that the persons excluded are members of a cognizable group; and third, the moving party must show a strong likelihood that such persons are being challenged because of group association.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“Trial lawyers recognize that it is a combination of factors rather than any single one which often leads to the exercise of a peremptory challenge. In addition, the particular combination or mix of jurors which a lawyer seeks may, and often does, change as certain jurors are removed or seated in the jury box.”
4 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.