Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 128 Ill. App. 3d 611 - People v. Stack

128 Ill. App. 3d 611 - People v. Stack’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

32
cited by 32 later decisions
2
states following
January 2020
most recently cited

32 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently January 2020 · most notably 112 Ill. 2d 301 - People v. Stack (1986), 238 Ill. App. 3d 602 - People v. Aliwoli (1992)

32 state decisions

22019841990200020102020decided

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 Griffin v. California · 79 Ill. 2d 103 - People v. Greer · 79 Ill. App. 3d 156 - People v. Witted · 61 Ill. 2d 559 - People v. Ward · 108 Ill. App. 3d 891 - People v. Teague

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

  1. ““1. Do you have any feeling or viewpoint concerning the defense of insanity? If so, what is it? 2. Do you agree that a person should not be held responsible for his acts if he is not capable to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law?””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “"Although the questions tendered by the defense in this case were designed to probe and discover any potential bias or prejudice regarding the insanity defense, the only question asked pertained to personal experiences with a psychiatrist or psychologist. This question was insufficient to elicit a response concerning the insanity defense. Further, the general questions of whether the jurors could follow the law and whether they could be fair and impartial were also insufficient to cure the error. Such broad inquiries failed to call attention to specific matters which might lead the jurors to display disqualifying attitudes and preoccupations."”
    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.