People v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently July 2007
16 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 Lanzetta v. State New Jersey · 10 Cal. 3d 703 - People v. Sedeno · 69 Cal. 2d 122 - People v. Bassett · 17 Cal. 3d 614 - People v. Richards · 49 Cal. 2d 409 - People v. McCaughan
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.
“[t]he legislative declaration that imprisonment has a punitive purpose is in no way inconsistent with the notion that the sentencing process as a whole has a variety of objectives. Obviously, dispositions as diverse as unsupervised probation, probation with some time in county jail, and imprisonment in the state prison serve a variety of purposes including rehabilitation and restitution.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[d]eterring others from criminal conduct by demonstrating its consequences.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the purpose of imprisonment for crime is punishment,”
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.