Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 13 Ill. App. 3d 296 - People v. Reddock

13 Ill. App. 3d 296 - People v. Reddock’s Empirical Analysis

1973

Citation profile

56
cited by 56 later decisions
2
states following
February 2026
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 53 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently February 2026 · most notably 176 Ill. 2d 326 - People v. Olinger (1997), 16 Ill. App. 3d 930 - People v. Pruitt (1974)

3 federal appellate · 53 state decisions

240197319801990200020102020decided

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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Gilbert v. California · United States v. Dionisio · Romano v. United States · Stroud v. United States

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

  1. ““[T]he trial court permitted the wife of a murder victim to testify regarding the deceased’s statement made prior to departure from their home in which he spoke of his plan to travel with the defendant on a business trip. The Supreme Court of North Carolina held that although hearsay, the statement was properly admitted as an exception to the hearsay rule in that it satisfied the two-fold basis for hearsay exceptions: necessity (provided by the unavailability of the declarant), and a reasonable probability of truthfulness ***.” Reddock, 13 Ill. App. 3d at 304 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““* * * that his integrity or veracity is doubtful and that neither side desires to vouch for his testimony. Additionally, the testimony must relate to direct issues and be necessary in order to prevent a miscarriage of justice. [Citations.]””
    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.