101 Ill. 2d 147 - People v. Silagy’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 federal appellate · 197 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 217 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Nor do we consider, as the defendant says, that his decision to discharge his attorneys interfered with society's interest in the fair administration of justice. The sentencing body is required to give consideration to all mitigating facts in the trial record ( People v. Carlson (1980), 79 Ill.2d 564, 589-90 [ 38 Ill.Dec. 809 , 404 N.E.2d 233 ]) as well as to any mitigating evidence the defendant offers at the sentencing hearing ( People v. Lewis (1981), 88 Ill.2d 129, 144 [ 58 Ill.Dec. 895 , 430 N.E.2d 1346 ]). In Lewis, this court noted that in some instances a defendant may choose not to present evidence during the sentencing phase in aggravation and mitigation. 88 Ill.2d 129, 147 [ 58 Ill.Dec. 895 , 430 N.E.2d 1346 ]; see Johnson, The Death Row Right to Die: Suicide or Intimate Decision?, 54 S.Cal.L.Rev. 575 (1981). Society's interest in the proper administration of justice is preserved by giving a defendant the right freely to present evidence in mitigation, by requiring the sentencing body to find aggravating factors before imposing the death penalty, and by requiring that a sentence of death be reviewed by this court. These practices are to assure that the death penalty will not be imposed arbitrarily.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Wallace v. State · 527 So. 2d 800 - Hamblen v. State

2. ““(a) A person is not criminally responsible for conduct if at the time of such conduct, as a result of mental disease or mental defect, he lacks substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of law. (b) The terms ‘mental disease or mental defect’ do not include an abnormality manifested only by repeated criminal or otherwise antisocial conduct. (c) A person who, at the time of the commission of a criminal offense, was not insane but was suffering from a mental illness, [sic] is not relieved of criminal responsibility for his conduct and may be found guilty but mentally ill. (d) For purposes of this Section, ‘mental illness’ or ‘mentally ill’ means a substantial disorder of thought, mood, or behavior which afflicted a person at the time of the commission of the offense and which impaired that person’s judgment, but not to the extent that he was unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of his behavior or is unable to conform his conduct to the requirements of law.” Ill. Rev. Stat. 1981, ch. 38, pars. 6 — 2(a) through (d).”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 233 Ill. App. 3d 666 - People v. Glenn · 147 Ill. App. 3d 881 - People v. Moore

3. “`nearly universal conviction, on the part of our people as well as our courts, that forcing a lawyer upon an unwilling defendant is contrary to his basic right to defend himself if he truly wants to do so.'”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 169 Ill. App. 3d 1 - People v. Davis · People v. Wright