In Re Schoengarth’s Empirical Analysis
1967
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 145 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 183 later decisions — most recently March 2015 · most notably 8 Cal. 3d 410 - In Re Lynch (1972), 1 Cal. 3d 524 - People v. St. Martin (1970)
19 federal appellate · 145 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 62 Cal. 2d 338 - People v. Dorado · 34 Cal. 2d 300 - In Re Swain · 64 Cal. 2d 412 - In Re Sandel · People v. Denne · Mark O. Hatfield, Governor of the State of Oregon v. Paul R. Bailleaux
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 183 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Section 20J provides that a prisoner “may waive the issuance and service of the warrant ... and all other procedure incidental to interstate rendition proceedings, by executing or subscribing in the presence of any court or justice of this commonwealth ... a writing which states that he consents to return to the demanding state; provided, that ... it shall be the duty of such court or justice to inform such person of his rights to the issuance and service of a warrant in interstate rendition and to obtain a writ of habeas corpus as provided in section nineteen_ provided, that nothing in this section shall be deemed to limit the right of the accused person to return voluntarily and without formality to the demanding state nor shall the foregoing waiver procedure be deemed to be an exclusive procedure or to limit the powers, rights or duties of the officers of the demanding state or of this commonwealth.” (emphasis added).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Brown v. Ponte“`In determining whether the privilege of parole shall be granted a prisoner, that authority is not guided solely by the good conduct of the prisoner while incarcerated. The nature of his offense, his age, his prior associations, his habits, inclinations and traits of character, the probability of his reformation and the interests of public security are all taken into consideration.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[t]he Adult Authority, by statute, has exclusive jurisdiction to fix the length of time a prisoner must serve within the limits of an indeterminate sentence. (Pen.Code §§ 3020, 5077.) One who is legally convicted has no vested right to the determination of his sentence at less than maximum [citations], and hence the authority `may redetermine such sentences as conditions require'.”
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.