People v. Failla’s Empirical Analysis
1966
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 271 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 281 later decisions — most recently July 2020 · most notably 27 Cal. 4th 287 - People v. Hughes (2002), People v. Graham (1969)
7 federal appellate · 271 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 46 Cal. 2d 818 - People v. Watson · Neal v. State of California · 58 Cal. 2d 748 - People v. McFarland · 53 Cal. 2d 322 - People v. Wade · 50 Cal. 2d 383 - People v. Wein
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 281 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a sufficient entry is made to warrant a conviction of burglary when any part of the body of the intruder is inside the premises.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““Here, as in those cases, defendant’s course of conduct after he first accosted his victim comprised an ‘indivisible transaction’; i. e., the technical kidnapping of his victim was intended merely to take her out of the presence of her roommate so that he could pursue his sexual purposes in the adjoining room without fear of interruption. Accordingly, both the kidnapping and the sexual misconduct were ‘incident to one objective,’ and double punishment therefor would be prohibited.” 51 Cal.Rptr. at 110 , 414 P.2d at 46 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“But where the evidence permits an inference that the defendant at the time of entry intended to commit one or more felonies and also an inference that his intent was merely to commit one or more misdemeanors or acts not punishable as crimes, the court must define 'felony' and must instruct the jury which acts, among those which the jury could infer the defendant intended to commit, amounted to felonies. Failure to do so is error, for it allows the triers of fact to indulge in unguided speculation as to what kinds of criminal conduct are serious enough to warrant punishment as felonies and incorporation into the burglary statute.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. People v. Failla
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.