People v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 216 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 221 later decisions — most recently March 2026 · most notably 156 Ill. 2d 149 - People v. Davis (1993), 224 Ill. 2d 37 - People v. Suarez (2007)
2 federal appellate · 216 state decisions
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 Strickland v. Washington · Pennsylvania v. Finley · 104 Ill. 2d 504 - People v. Albanese · Connecticut Performing Arts Foundation, Inc. v. Brown · 153 Ill. 2d 264 - People v. Flores
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 221 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Rule 651(c) requires post-conviction counsel to file an affidavit certifying that he or she has complied with these requirements. Although this court has held that compliance with the duties set out in Rule 651(c) is mandatory, the absence of counsel’s affidavit will be excused where the record demonstrates that counsel adequately fulfilled his duties "as post-conviction counsel. People v. Szabo (1991), 144 Ill. 2d 525 .” Johnson, 154 Ill. 2d at 238 .”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"In the ordinary case, a trial court ruling upon a motion to dismiss a post-conviction petition which is not supported by affidavits or other documents may reasonably presume that post-conviction counsel made a concerted effort to obtain affidavits in support of the post-conviction claims, but was unable to do so." People v. Johnson , 154 Ill. 2d 227 , 241, 182 Ill.Dec. 1 , 609 N.E.2d 304 (1993).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"[T]hat the attorney * * * consult[] with petitioner either by mail or in person to ascertain his contentions of deprivation of constitutional rights, * * * examine[] the record of the proceedings at the trial, and * * * ma[k]e any amendments to the petitions filed pro se that are necessary for an adequate presentation of petitioner's contentions." Ill. S.Ct. R. 651(c) (eff.Dec.1, 1984).”
3 later decisions 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.