People v. Ibarra’s Empirical Analysis
1963
Citation profile
38 federal appellate · 2 district · 1,013 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,098 later decisions (6 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2016 · most notably Schneckloth v. Bustamonte (1973), Faretta v. California (1975)
38 federal appellate · 2 district · 1,013 state decisions — followed in 16 states
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 Jones v. United States · Powell v. State of Alabama Patterson · Rochin v. People of California · 44 Cal. 2d 434 - People v. Cahan · 45 Cal. 2d 755 - People v. Martin
Cited together with 64 Cal. 2d 766 - People v. Reeves · Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · 2 Cal. 3d 1033 - In Re Saunders · Chapman v. State of California · Powell v. State of Alabama Patterson
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 1,098 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is counsel’s duty to investigate carefully all defenses of fact' and of law that may be available to the defendant, and if his failure to do so results in withdrawing a crucial defense from the case, the defendant has not had the assistance to which he is entitled, [citations omitted]” 3 Ariz.App. at 204 , 412 P.2d at 882 .”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage“[Citations]. It must appear that counsel's lack of diligence or competence reduced the trial to a 'farce or sham.' [Citations]”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage““This rule should be a commonplace to any attorney engaged in criminal trials. * * * Counsel’s failure to object precluded resolution of the crucial factual issues supporting defendant’s primary defense. It thereby reduced his trial to a farce and a sham.””
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.