Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 867 P.2d 880 - People v. Thomas

People v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

51
cited by 51 later decisions
2
states following
January 2025
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 43 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently January 2025 · most notably John ARDOLINO v. The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado (2003), Colorado Ground Water Commission v. Eagle Peak Farms, Ltd. (1996)

2 federal appellate · 43 state decisions

1901994200020102020decided

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 Strickland v. Washington · Faretta v. California · Griffin v. People of the State of Illinois · Brooks v. Tennessee · United States v. MacCollom

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

  1. “'When possible, statutes are to be construed in such manner as to avoid questions of their constitutional validity.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(a) A case in which the court entering judgment of conviction did not have jurisdiction over the subject matter of the alleged offense; (b) A case in which the court entering judgment of conviction did not have jurisdiction over the person of the defendant; (c) Where the court hearing the collateral attack finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the failure to seek relief within the applicable time period was caused by an adjudication of incompetence or by commitment of the defendant to an institution for treatment as a mentally ill person; or (d)Where the court hearing the collateral attack finds that the failure to seek relief within the applicable time period was the result of circumstances amounting to justifiable excuse or excusable neglect.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[ejven assuming trial and appellate counsel have provided ineffective assistance by failing to present exculpatory evidence, Mr. McCary fails to demonstrate that he cannot pursue his claims and present the exculpatory evidence in a state court postconviction motion after his direct appeal concludes. In fact, to the extent Mr. McCary is claiming counsel was ineffective, the Colorado Supreme Court “has expressed a preference for having ineffective assistance of counsel claims brought in [postconviction] Crim. P. 35(c) proceedings.””
    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.