People v. Valenti’s Empirical Analysis
1957
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 126 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 131 later decisions — most recently November 2014 · most notably 18 Cal. 3d 698 - People v. Chi Ko Wong (1976), 3 Cal. 3d 89 - People v. Tenorio (1970)
2 federal appellate · 126 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 44 Cal. 2d 434 - People v. Cahan · Badillo v. Superior Court · 47 Cal. 2d 45 - People v. Burke · In Re McVickers · 45 Cal. 2d 590 - People v. Tarantino
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 131 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“. . . the right of appeal is statutory and a judgment . . . is not appealable unless it is expressly made so by statute”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“`the order in question is, in its nature and character, one from which the people cannot appeal. The power under which the order was made [section 1385] is substantially the same as that held by the attorney-general in England, and by the prosecuting officer in many of the American states, to enter a nolle prosequi. The court, for the purposes of the order of dismissal, takes charge of the prosecution, and acts for the people. It holds the power to dismiss, as the attorney-general in England holds the power to enter a nolle prosequi, by virtue of the office and the law; and it is exercised upon official responsibility. The court having acted for the people, and under express power granted by them to so act in their criminal prosecutions, there is no appeal on their part for such action.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“by any other tribunal. In Valenti, for example, the trial judge during trial dismissed the information on the ground that defendant's arrest was unlawful, and this court recognized that an accused who has been subjected to an unlawful arrest, search, or seizure does not by virtue of such illegality gain immunity from punishment for the offense for which he was arrested or which was disclosed by the search. The court went on to hold that since the order was not appealable under accepted rules we would not by fiat announce that it is appealable merely because it is”
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.