155 Ill. 2d 188 - People v. Bole’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
136 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 137 later decisions — most recently March 2024 · most notably 168 Ill. 2d 107 - People v. Arna (1995), 172 Ill. 2d 452 - People v. Robinson (1996)
136 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 128 Ill. 2d 448 - People v. Bryant · 129 Ill. 2d 233 - People v. Chandler · 152 Ill. 2d 533 - State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Yapejian · 118 Ill. 2d 263 - People v. Haywood · 115 Ill. 2d 337 - Stewart v. Industrial Commission
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 137 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"(a) When multiple sentences of imprisonment are imposed on a defendant at the same time, or when a term of imprisonment is imposed on a defendant who is already subject to sentence in this State *** the sentences shall run concurrently or consecutively as determined by the court. *** The court shall not impose consecutive sentences for offenses which were committed as part of a single course of conduct during which there was no substantial change in the nature of the criminal objective, unless, one of the offenses for which defendant was convicted was a Class X or Class 1 felony and the defendant inflicted severe bodily injury, or where the defendant was convicted of a violation of Section 12 — 13 or 12 — 14 of the Criminal Code of 1961, in which event the court shall enter sentences to run consecutively. Sentences shall run concurrently unless otherwise specified by the court.” (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1989, ch. 38, par. 1005 — 8—4 (a).)”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he test to be used in determining whether a particular offense is part of a single course of conduct, during which there was no substantial change in the nature of the criminal objective, is the independent motivation test; that is, were the defendant’s acts independently motivated?” Given the supreme court’s subsequent decision in Bole, however, it is uncertain whether Harris states the proper test for determining a single course of conduct under section 5 — 8—4. In Bole, the supreme court stated that it was unclear whether the statutory language”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"We have determined that the statute plainly requires the imposition of consecutive sentences only when the subject offenses are committed in a single course of conduct ***.” Bole, 155 Ill. 2d at 198 .”
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.