Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 791 P2D 702 - People v. Fuller

People v. Fuller’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

105
cited by 105 later decisions
1
states following
October 2024
most recently cited

105 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 105 later decisions — most recently October 2024 · most notably The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Petitioner/Cross-Respondent v. Wayne Robert STEWART, Respondent/Cross-Petitioner. (2002), People v. Leske (1998)

105 state decisions

4701990200020102020decided

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 People v. District Court, Second Judicial District · People v. CALVAREST · Fein v. Permanente Medical Group · People v. Watkins · People v. Vigil

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

  1. “No person summoned as a juror shall be disqualified by reason of a previously formed or expressed opinion with reference to the guilt or innocence of the accused, if the court is satisfied, from the examination of the juror or from other evidence, that he will render an impartial verdict according to the law and the evidence submitted to the jury at the trial.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[the General Assembly could have rationally decided that violent crimes committed as part of the same incident pose a greater threat to society than the same criminal conduct committed. separately in different violent criminal episodes”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “If the sentence is within the range required by law, is based on appropriate considerations as reflected in the record, and is factually supported by the cireumstances of the case, an appellate court must uphold the sentence.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.