People v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis
1958
Citation profile
191 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 191 later decisions — most recently May 2016 · most notably Neal v. State of California (1960), 58 Cal. 2d 748 - People v. McFarland (1962)
191 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 35 Cal. 2d 175 - People v. Knowles · 30 Cal. 2d 589 - People v. Greer · 15 Cal. 2d 731 - People v. Kynette · People v. Roberts · 25 Cal. 2d 341 - People v. Wilson
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 191 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An act or omission which is made punishable in different ways by different provisions of this code may be punished under either of such provisions, but in no case can it be punished under more than one.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“has been applied not only where there was but one 'act' in the ordinary sense ... but also where a course of conduct violated more than one statute and the problem was whether it comprised a divisible transaction which could be punished under more than one statute within the meaning of section 654.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““The People rely also upon the testimony of Dr. Randall, who treated Clara on January 30, 1956, as corroboration. The doctor's testimony does not meet the test of connecting defendant with the abortion which Clara underwent. People v. Ramsey (1948), 83 Cal.App.2d 707, 717 [4] [ 189 P.2d 802 ], is inconsistent with People v. MacEwing (1955), supra, 45 Cal.2d 218, 225 [7], insofar as it suggests that testimony which does not itself connect the defendant with the criminal abortion is sufficient corroboration; in this respect the Ramsey case does not represent the law and, to avoid possible confusion, is to that extent disapproved.””
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.