48 Cal. 3d 321 - People v. Harrison’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 459 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 469 later decisions — most recently August 2022 · most notably 9 Cal. 4th 331 - People v. Scott (1994), 27 Cal. 4th 287 - People v. Hughes (2002)
6 federal appellate · 459 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 Neal v. State of California · 34 Cal. 3d 441 - People v. Dillon · 58 Cal. 2d 748 - People v. McFarland · 8 Cal. 3d 625 - People v. Beamon · 23 Cal. 3d 545 - People v. Perez
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 469 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]f all of the offenses were merely incident to, or were the means of accomplishing or facilitating one objective, defendant may be found to have harbored a single intent and therefore may be punished only once. [Citation.] [¶] If, on the other hand, defendant harbored 'multiple criminal objectives,' which were independent of and not merely incidental to each other, he may be punished for each statutory violation committed in pursuit of each objective, 'even though the violations shared common acts or were parts of an otherwise indivisible course of conduct.' [Citation.]”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“The Legislature, of course, is deemed to be aware of statutes and judicial decisions already in existence, and to have enacted or amended a statute in light thereof. [Citation.]”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“[w]here a statute is framed in language of an earlier enactment on the same or an analogous subject, and that enactment has been judicially construed, [Congress] is presumed to have adopted that”
3 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.