Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 64 CAL2D 816 - In Re Klor

In Re Klor’s Empirical Analysis

1966

Citation profile

77
cited by 77 later decisions
3
cited 3 times by the Supreme Court
4
states following
December 2017
most recently cited

3 district · 67 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 77 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2017 · most notably 1 Cal. 3d 767 - In Re Bushman (1970), 17 Cal. 3d 575 - California Housing Finance Agency v. Elliott (1976)

3 district · 67 state decisions

370196619701980199020002010decided

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 Johnson v. Zerbst · Robinson v. State of California · 19 Cal. 2d 488 - In Re Bell · 64 Cal. 2d 70 - In re Carlson

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

  1. “Petitioners in the present case have failed to sustain the burden of proving that they were not tried and convicted for acts of violence since the transcripts of testimony at their trials reveal evidence of such acts. ... Because petitioners have failed to sustain the burden of proving that they were not convicted of the one valid provision of the ordinance prohibiting acts of violence, the writ heretofore issued is discharged and the petitioners are remanded to the custody of the sheriff of Yuba County.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “So strong was the evidence tending to establish petitioner's guilt under the erroneous portion of the charge and so weak the evidence which would ground a conviction under the valid portion that we determine that petitioner can discharge his `burden of proving that he was not ... convicted for violating the valid part....'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “the burden of proving that their convictions were based not upon the constitutional but upon the unconstitutional provisions of the ordinance”
    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.