Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 69 CAL2D 51 - People v. Marshall

People v. Marshall’s Empirical Analysis

1968

Citation profile

371
cited by 371 later decisions
10
states following
June 2013
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 3 district · 355 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 371 later decisions — most recently June 2013 · most notably 1 Cal. 3d 80 - People v. Bradley (1969), 7 Cal. 3d 710 - People v. Sirhan (1972)

4 federal appellate · 3 district · 355 state decisions — followed in 10 states

2370196819701980199020002010decided

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 · Johnson v. United States · Gilbert v. California · Ker v. State of California · United States v. Rabinowitz

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

  1. “[6] Of importance to the case at bar is the discussion of plain view found in Erickson . In holding that the contents of a locked suitcase were not in plain view, we alluded to Justice Traynor's statement that [i]t is inherently impossible for the contents of a closed opaque container to be in plain view regardless of the size of the container or the material it is made of. A search of the container is necessary to disclose its contents. [7] Of particular significance here is the rejection in Erickson of”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “a search will reveal contraband ... does not justify a search without a warrant.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “`imminent destruction, removal, or concealment of the property intended to be seized'”
    2 later decisions 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.