129 Ill. 2d 233 - People v. Chandler’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 federal appellate · 180 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 187 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Defendant was charged with four counts of murder, including felony murder ***. Counsel’s apparent strategy was to convince the jury, in closing argument, to believe defendant’s denial, in his statements to the police, -of killing the victim. This strategy was the basis of counsel’s deficiency. Counsel did not attempt to develop a theory of innocence during his cross-examination of several witnesses, and did not cross-examine several key witnesses at all. Moreover, counsel presented no witnesses on behalf of the defense and failed to call defendant to the stand even though he had stated in his opening argument that defendant would testify and tell the jury what he did and did not do. Defense counsel apparently mistakenly believed that the jury could find defendant not guilty of murder if they believed that he had not inflicted the fatal wounds to the victim. Indeed, defense counsel concluded his closing argument by telling the jury, T don’t think if you take a realistic view of this that you can find [defendant] guilty of murder.’ The jury, however, having been instructed on both felony murder and accountability, had no choice but to find defendant guilty of murder, residential burglary and arson. The jury could have returned a not-guilty verdict on the charged offenses only if it had chosen to disregard the jury instructions. Counsel had admitted that defendant was telling the truth in his statements to the police, and that he had broken into the victim’s house. The ultimate”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. People v. Gant · 206 Ill. App. 3d 217 - People v. Combs

2. “(6) the murdered individual was killed in the course of another felony if: (a) the murdered individual: (i) was actually killed by the defendant, or (ii) received physical injuries personally inflicted by the defendant substantially contemporaneously with physical injuries caused by one or more persons for whose conduct the defendant is legally accountable under Section 5-2 of this Code, and the physical injuries inflicted by either the defendant or the other person or persons for whose conduct he is legally accountable caused the death of the murdered individual.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 151 Ill. 2d 498 - People v. Ramey · 164 Ill. 2d 279 - People v. Byron

3. “required by the sixth amendment and granted the defendant a new trial regardless of the overwhelming proof of guilt. Hattery, 109 Ill.2d at 464 , 94 Ill.Dec. 514 , 488 N.E.2d 513 . In People v. Johnson (1989), 128 Ill.2d 253, 269 , 131 Ill.Dec. 562 , 538 N.E.2d 1118 the Illinois Supreme court stated that Hattery did not hold that it is per se ineffectiveness of counsel whenever an attorney concedes his client's guilt to offenses and the record fails to show the client's consent. The court noted that”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 189 Ill. App. 3d 580 - People v. Banks · 244 Ill. App. 3d 55 - In Re DC