People v. Billips’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
2 district · 28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently September 2011 · most notably The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant v. Frank D. RODRIGUEZ, Defendant-Appellant/Cross-Appellee. (1996), People v. Zapotocky (1994)
2 district · 28 state decisions
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 Sanders v. United States · Weaver v. Graham · Gryger v. Burke · Cummings v. The State of Missouri · John McDonald v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“merely because it might operate on a fact or status preexisting the effective date of the legislation, as long as its punitive features apply only to acts committed after the statutory proscription becomes effective.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. People v. DeWitt“which imposes a punishment for an act which was not punishable at the time it was committed; or imposes additional punishment to that then prescribed.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. People v. DeWitt“it must be retrospective, that is, it must apply to events occurring before its enactment,”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. People v. DeWitt
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.