13 Ill. App. 3d 60 - People v. Null’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

20 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““It is urged that it is a denial of equal protection to modify a sentence pursuant to the Code where a direct appeal pends, as in Chupich, but to deny such procedure in post-conviction. The statute concerning post-conviction provides a proceeding civil in nature in which petitioner has the burden of proof. (People v. Harper, 43 Ill. 2d 368 , 253 N.E.2d 451 .) It is a new proceeding which inquires into constitutional issues not already adjudicated. (People v. Derengowski, 44 Ill. 2d 476 , 256 N.E.2d 455 .) Paragraph 122 — 1 requires that the petition be filed within 20 years after final adjudication. It is thus a form of collateral attack upon a final judgment. See Fontaine v. United States, (U.S.), 36 L. Ed. 2d 169 , (93 Sup. Ct.). The state had a legitimate interest in seeking a finality of judgment and the distinction between direct appeals and appeals from a collateral attack upon the conviction is not unreasonable and arbitrary. People v. Spears, 50 Ill. 2d 14 , 276 N.E.2d 322 .””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 40 Ill. App. 3d 972 - People v. Allen