135 Ill. 2d 18 - People v. Fields’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

132 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 143 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““[T]he Supreme Court spécifically rejected the claim that defendants convicted of capital crimes have a constitutional right to demand that the jury consider ‘residual doubts’ over guilt at the sentencing phase. [Citation.] The Court stated that ‘residual doubt’ over a defendant’s guilt is not a ‘mitigating circumstance' because it is not a fact about the defendant’s character or the circumstances of his crime which may call for a penalty less than death. Accordingly, the Court concluded that the rule that a sentencer may not be precluded from considering any relevant mitigating circumstance did not require consideration of ‘residual doubt’ over defendant’s guilt at the sentencing hearing.” Fields, 135 Ill. 2d at 67 , citing Franklin v. Lynaugh (1988), 487 U.S. 164, 172 , 101 L. Ed. 2d 155, 165 , 108 S. Ct. 2320, 2327 .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 142 Ill. 2d 410 - People v. Morgan · 157 Ill. 2d 201 - People v. Edgeston

2. “"The trial court chose, it would appear, to believe the testimony of the State’s witnesses and not that of the defense witnesses. While discrepancies in the evidence certainly existed, we cannot say that the trial court’s conclusion was so unreasonable, improbable or unsatisfactory as to justify a reasonable doubt as to the defendants’ guilt. [Citations.] Accordingly, we hold that the evidence, believed by the trial court, was sufficient to prove the defendants guilty of the murders of Jerome Smith and Taiman Hickman beyond a reasonable doubt.” Fields, 135 Ill. 2d at 49 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 181 Ill. 2d 41 - People v. Hawkins

3. “"If you walk into that jury room and you find that the mitigating factors are not sufficient to preclude the imposition of the death penalty, the law says that you have to do it [impose the death penalty]. The facts in this case compel it. The law requires it. Justice absolutely demands it. There are no mitigating factors sufficient to preclude capital punishment.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 171 Ill. 2d 74 - People v. Moore