People v. Hashimoto’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
35 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently June 2011 · most notably 46 Cal. 3d 419 - People v. Freeman (1988), People v. Zambia (2011)
35 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 62 Cal. 2d 692 - People v. Hillery · 40 Cal. 2d 876 - People v. Daugherty · 3 Cal. 3d 421 - People v. Reilly · People v. Montgomery · 242 Cal. App. 2d 645 - In Re Davis
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“designed to discourage prostitution by discouraging persons other than the prostitute from augmenting and expanding a prostitute's operation, or increasing the supply of available prostitutes.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The fact that the defendant apparently was not to receive any money from the venture directly is not fatal to the conviction. The purpose of the anti-pandering statute [citation] is to `cover all the various ramifications of the social evil of pandering and include them all in the definition of the crime, with a view of effectively combating the evil sought to be condemned.' [Citations.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The credibility of the witnesses is an issue for the trier of fact and the judgment of the trial court will not be reversed unless there is no substantial evidence in the record that will support the conclusion of the trier of fact.”
1 later decision 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.