67 Cal. 2d 64 - People v. Ross’s Empirical Analysis
1967
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 2 district · 315 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 327 later decisions — most recently December 2018 · most notably 491 So. 2d 1129 - State v. DiGuilio (1986), 18 Cal. 3d 889 - People v. DeVaughn (1977)
4 federal appellate · 2 district · 315 state decisions — followed in 12 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 Chapman v. State of California · Gideon v. Wainwright · United States v. Wade · Kotteakos v. United States · Brinegar v. United States
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 327 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Overwhelming evidence of guilt does not negate the fact that an error that constituted a substantial part of the prosecution's case may have played a substantial part in the jury's deliberation and thus contributed to the actual verdict reached, for the jury may have reached its verdict because of the error without considering other reasons untainted by error that would have supported the same result.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage“that state of facts as would lead a man of ordinary care and prudence to believe and conscientiously entertain an honest and strong suspicion that the person is guilty of a crime.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“In the present case, as in Chapman , the comments and instruction on defendant's silence constituted a substantial part of the prosecution's case. It served to make defendant a witness against himself by using his silence to stifle the doubts that might have been engendered by the inconsistencies in the prosecution's case. (Citing Griffin ). It denied defendant a substantial right, for it served to deprive him of his only defense. Under these circumstances the Attorney General has not established beyond a reasonable doubt that the verdict would have been the same in the absence of error ...”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Gladue
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.