110 Ill. App. 3d 46 - People v. Buford’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
53 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 54 later decisions — most recently May 2017 · most notably 98 Ill. 2d 45 - People v. Payne (1983), 173 W. Va. 317 - State v. Peyatt (1983)
53 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 Davis v. Alaska · Greene v. McElroy · 68 Ill. 2d 149 - People v. Perruquet · 79 Ill. 2d 564 - People v. Carlson · 91 Ill. 2d 536 - People v. Huckstead
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 54 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In prosecutions for aggravated criminal sexual assault, criminal sexual assault, aggravated criminal sexual abuse or criminal sexual abuse, the prior sexual activity or the reputation of the alleged victim is inadmissible except as evidence concerning the past sexual conduct of the alleged victim with the accused.” (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1985, ch. 38, par. 115-7(a).)”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““It is true that the court’s range of discretion in fixing a sentence permits a recognition of the rehabilitative potential of the defendant. [Citation.] However, it can hardly be contended that defendant’s potential for rehabilitation was not considered by the trial judge where, as here, the evidence concerning the violence of the crime committed and the defendant’s extensive record of prior convictions speak so eloquently to that very factor.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““In Davis, the [C]ourt noted that the defense was confronted with a situation in which the jury simply could not be made aware of the defendant’s theory of the case. In the instant case, the defense presented its theory of the case at length. *** ‘Complainant’s past sexual conduct has no bearing on whether she has consented to sexual relations with defendant.’ [Citation.]” 110 Ill. App. 3d at 52 .”
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.