People v. Hickman’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 58 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently February 2025 · most notably City of Greenwood Village v. for the Proposed City of Centennial (2000), People v. Cross (2006)
2 federal appellate · 58 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 Broadrick v. Oklahoma · Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc. · New York v. Ferber · Rav v. City of St Paul Minnesota · City of Houston v. Hill
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 62 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“vague, not in the sense that it requires a person to conform his conduct to an imprecise but comprehensible normative standard, but rather in the sense that no standard of conduct is specified at all.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. People v. Lovato · People v. Nerud“An individual commits retaliation against a witness or victim if such person uses a threat, act of harassment ... or act of harm or injury upon any person or property, which action is directed to or committed upon a witness or a victim to any crime ... as retaliation against such witness or victim.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A court has a responsibility to apply a limiting construction or partial invalidation if doing so will preserve the statute's constitutionality.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Vargas v. Owens · A.P.E. v. People
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.