Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 64 Cal. App. 27 - People v. Hubbard

64 Cal. App. 27 - People v. Hubbard’s Empirical Analysis

1923

Citation profile

50
cited by 50 later decisions
3
states following
March 2008
most recently cited

50 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently March 2008 · most notably People v. Carmen (1951), 3 Cal. 3d 578 - Taylor v. Superior Court (1970)

50 state decisions

120192319301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 People v. Doyell · People v. Holmes · Morgan v. Durfee · People v. Olsen · Fawkes v. Reynolds

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

  1. ““It is quite possible that the jurors, because they were not instructed as to his right to eject Cope from the premises and to use all force reasonably necessary to that end, believed that defendant was guilty of a felony in endeavoring to remove Cope by force; and is quite possible that the verdict of murder in the second degree was returned because, and solely because, the jury believed that the shot which killed Cope, even if it were fired accidentally and unintentionally, was fired while defendant was committing or attempting to commit a felony. These considerations will show how essential it was that the jury should be fully instructed with respect to defendant’s right to eject Cope and to use force if necessary. ’ ’”
    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.