77 Cal. App. 4th 557 - People v. Robert E.’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
May 2001
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Massiah v. United States · Harris v. New York · Brewer v. Williams · McNeil v. Wisconsin
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The perjury occurred after Robert was accused of the underlying charges and was not part of the same conduct. [¶] ... We reject the defense suggestion that the Sixth Amendment right to counsel applies generally from arraignment through the appeal period. Such a rule would make it difficult to prosecute a defendant for any post-arraignment conduct somehow related to the pending charges. Massiah [v. United States, supra, 377 U.S. 201 , 84 S.Ct. 1199 ] is not a license to intimidate witnesses, solicit the murder of witnesses, suborn or commit perjury, or attempt an escape.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“courts examine the time, place, victims, and circumstances surrounding the offenses to determine whether a defendant is being pursued for essentially the same activities.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“derive from the same `factual predicate' as the charged offense”
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.