175 Ill. 2d 1 - People v. Kidd’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 122 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 127 later decisions — most recently October 2025 · most notably 185 Ill. 2d 179 - People v. Bull (1998), 187 Ill. 2d 91 - People v. Brooks (1999)
3 federal appellate · 122 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 Simmons v. United States · Ornelas v. United States · Beck v. State of Ohio · Arizona v. Fulminante · Napue v. People of the State of Illinois
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 127 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“This court rejected defendant’s argument, stating: “The statements at issue were all made by the defendant and, so long as they were relevant to the case, could be introduced against him as admissions of a party opponent. [Citations.] If the defendant has given various accounts of his activities on the night of the offenses, then, as the trial judge noted in refusing to exclude the prior testimony, ‘that’s his problem, and he has to live with it.’ We do not believe that the State must now be disabled from presenting the defendant’s earlier inculpatory statements simply because there are discrepancies in what the defendant has said at different times on different occasions.” Kidd, 175 Ill. 2d at 29 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“"In deciding whether the defendant should be sentenced to death, you should consider all the aggravating factors supported by the evidence and all the mitigating factors supported by the evidence * * *. Mitigating factors include: Any reason supported by the evidence why the defendant should not be sentenced to death. Where there is evidence of a mitigating factor, the fact that such mitigating factor is not a factor specifically listed in these instructions does not preclude your consideration of the evidence." See IPI Criminal 3d No. 7C.06.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent““ ‘If, as the result of a quarrel, a fight occurs in which one of the parties is overcome, and the other then, without having formed the intention before the fight began, takes the money of the vanquished one, the offense committed is robbery.’ ” People v. Strickand, 154 Ill. 2d 489, 524 , 609 N.E.2d 1366 (1992), quoting People v. Jordan, 303 Ill. 316, 319 , 135 N.E. 729 (1922).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.