Ex parte Rosenheim’s Empirical Analysis
1890
Citation profile
1 district · 64 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 67 later decisions — most recently January 2009 · most notably 43 Cal. 3d 1104 - People v. Anderson (1987), 35 Cal. 3d 131 - Carlos v. Superior Court (1983)
1 district · 64 state decisions
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 Ex parte Wadleigh · People v. Righetti · Ex parte Neustadt
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 67 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A judgment that the defendant pay a fine may also direct that he be imprisoned until the fine be satisfied, specifying the extent of the imprisonment, which must not exceed one day for every dollar of the fine.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In re Sanborn“defendant is entitled to the benefit of every reasonable doubt, whether it arise out of a question of fact, or as to the true interpretation of words or the construction of language used in a statute . . . .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“they strengthen the theory that the legislature did not intend section 1205 to apply to judgments for both imprisonment and fine.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. People v. Sayer
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.