People v. Green’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
15 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 19 Cal. 4th 1138 - Hubbart v. Superior Court · 9 Cal. 4th 1069 - Tobe v. City of Santa Ana · 14 Cal. 3d 338 - People v. Feagley · 28 Cal. 3d 161 - Conservatorship of Hofferber · 49 Cal. 3d 200 - People v. Andrews
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“...' [Citation.] [ถ] `Equal protection applies to ensure that persons similarly situated with respect to the legitimate purpose of the law receive like treatment; equal protection does not require identical treatment. [Citation.]' [Citation.] The state `may adopt more than one procedure for isolating, treating, and restraining dangerous persons; and differences will be upheld if justified. [Citations.] Variation of the length and conditions of confinement, depending on degrees of danger reasonably perceived as to special classes of persons, is a valid exercise of power.' [Citation.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“In order to establish a meritorious claim under the equal protection provisions of our state and federal Constitutions [an] appellant must first show that the state has adopted a classification that affects two or more similarly situated groups in an unequal manner.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Strict scrutiny is the appropriate standard against which to measure claims of disparate treatment in civil commitment. [Citations.]”
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.