Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 64 CAL2D 387 - People v. Carrillo

People v. Carrillo’s Empirical Analysis

1966

Citation profile

159
cited by 159 later decisions
2
states following
November 2005
most recently cited

8 federal appellate · 149 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 159 later decisions — most recently November 2005 · most notably 19 Cal. 3d 99 - People v. James (1977), 68 Cal. 2d 299 - People v. Rosales (1968)

8 federal appellate · 149 state decisions

102019661970198019902000decided

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 Ker v. State of California · 62 Cal. 2d 338 - People v. Dorado · People v. Stewart · People v. Maddox · 45 Cal. 2d 751 - People v. Michael

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

  1. “It must be borne in mind that the primary purpose of the constitutional guarantees is to prevent unreasonable invasions of the security of the people in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, and when an officer has reasonable cause to enter a dwelling to make an arrest and as an incident to that arrest is authorized to make a reasonable search, his entry and his search are not unreasonable. Suspects have no constitutional right to destroy or dispose of evidence, and no basic constitutional guarantees are violated because an officer succeeds in getting to a place where he is entitled to be more quickly than he would, had he complied with section 844 .”
    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.