157 Ill. 2d 68 - People v. Robinson’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
116 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 116 later decisions — most recently March 2026 · most notably 207 Ill. 2d 68 - People v. Moore (2003), 225 Ill. 2d 246 - People v. Stechly (2007)
116 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 122 Ill. 2d 176 - People v. Enoch · 92 Ill. 2d 545 - People v. Weaver · 147 Ill. 2d 173 - People v. Williams · 155 Ill. 2d 1 - People v. Sutherland · 142 Ill. 2d 22 - People v. Linscott
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 116 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"While a pro se motion for a new trial alleging ineffective assistance of counsel does not per se require appointment of new counsel to assist in the motion, the trial court must at least examine the factual matters underlying the defendant's claim. If after examining the factual matters, the trial court determines that the claim lacks merit or pertains only to matters of trial strategy, then new counsel does not need to be appointed and the pro se motion can be denied. If, however, the allegations show possible neglect of the case, new counsel should be appointed." Robinson, 157 Ill.2d at 86 , 191 Ill.Dec. 107 , 623 N.E.2d 352 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““[W]e believe that the imputation of such knowledge to the prosecution requires an individualized focus on the factual circumstances. Among the factors to be considered would be the reasonableness of such imputation, whether the failure to transmit such knowledge up the informational chain was inadvertent or intentional and whether any real prejudice occurred.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Williams“If this court were to conclude that the knowledge of every State employee who is involved in a criminal case is imputed to the prosecution, the control over criminal cases would be placed in the hands, and at the mercy, of every employee who touches the case.”
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.