Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 878 P.2d 685 - People v. Pate

People v. Pate’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
3
states following
April 2010
most recently cited

23 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently April 2010

23 state decisions

110199420002010decided

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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Illinois v. Gates · Nixon v. Administrator of General Services · Smith v. Miller · People v. Zapotocky

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

  1. “it is axiomatic that the judiciary has the exclusive power to impose sentences which fall within the limits determined by the General Assembly”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The powers of the government of this state are divided into three distinct departments — the legislative, executive and judicial; and no person or collection of persons charged with the exercise of powers properly belonging to one of these departments shall exercise any power properly belonging to either of the others, except as in this constitution expressly directed or permitted.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[W]hen a magistrate receives an affidavit which contains hearsay upon hearsay, he need not categorically reject this double hearsay information. Rather, he is called upon to evaluate this information as well as other information in the affidavit in order to determine whether it can be reasonably inferred that the informant had gained his information in a reliable way.”
    1 later decision 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.