52 Cal. 4th 769 - People v. Blacksher’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

108 state decisions

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

1. “they did not know why, where, or when the shooting had occurred. Nor did they know the location of the shooter or anything else about the circumstances [of the shooting]. The questions they asked—what had happened, who had shot him, and where the shooting occurred,—were the exact type of questions necessary to allow the police to assess the situation, the threat to their own safety, and possible danger to the potential victim and to the public.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 1 N.M. Ct. App. 698 - State v. Largo

2. “The prosecution's use of peremptory challenges to remove prospective jurors based on group bias, such as race or ethnicity, violates a defendant's right to trial by a jury drawn from a representative cross-section of the community under article I, section 16 of the California Constitution and his right to equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 247 Cal. App. 4th 660 - People v. Aleman

3. “Evidence of a statement or other conduct by a declarant that is inconsistent with a statement by such declarant received in evidence as hearsay evidence is not inadmissible for the purpose of attacking the credibility of the declarant though he is not given and has not had an opportunity to explain or to deny such inconsistent statement or other conduct.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 3 Cal. 5th 424 - People v. Hopson