People v. Verdier’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

16 state decisions

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

1. ““Under Penal Code section 1192 after a plea of guilty of a crime divided into degrees ‘the court must, before passing sentence, determine the degree.’ While a hearing to determine the degree of an offense held under this section is not a trial in its full technical sense and the court may consider matters not admissible on the issue of guilt or innocence, People v. Williams, 14 Cal.2d 532 , 95 P.2d 456 ; In re Steve, 73 Cal.App.2d 697 , 167 P.2d 243 , the burden of the decisions is that the court should take evidence in the presence of the defendant to determine the degree of the crime, [cases cited]. 5ji Jfí * # * * “It is clear that testimony taken in that separate proceeding, to which appellant was not a party and in which he had no right or opportunity of cross-examination or of offering evidence in his own behalf, was not evidence in his own case for the purpose of determining, after his plea of guilty, the degree of his offense.” 214 P.2d at 434 and 435.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Peel · Nieves González v. Jones

2. ““With respect to appellant’s other point based on People v. Lesterjette, 40 Cal.App.2d 327 [ 104 P.2d 844 ] that under section 969c, Penal Code, the fact that defendant was armed with a deadly weapon must be charged in the information if that fact is to be relied on in fixing the degree it is sufficient to point out that section 969c makes no reference to section 211a, Penal Code. The latter section provides: ‘All robbery which is perpetrated by torture or by a person being armed with a dangerous or deadly weapon is robbery in the first degree .. ., ’ but it is not necessary to allege such facts as long as the information or indictment charges the crime. (People v. Meyers, 31 Cal.App.2d 515 [ 88 P.2d 212 ].) The degree of a crime is not required to be included in the charge. (People v. Mendez, supra, 27 Cal.2d 20, 23 [ 161 P.2d 929 ].)””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. People v. Pond