176 Ill. 2d 261 - People v. Pulliam’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 50 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently March 2026 · most notably 183 Ill. 2d 366 - People v. Coleman (1998), 226 Ill. 2d 92 - People v. Wheeler (2007)
3 federal appellate · 50 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 Zant v. Stephens · 106 Ill. 2d 237 - People v. Collins · 104 Ill. 2d 504 - People v. Albanese · Buchanan v. Kentucky · Arave v. Creech
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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““We believe that the trial court properly exercised its discretion in refusing defendant’s requested instruction and in directing the jury to continue deliberating. Immediately before beginning its deliberations on defendant’s sentence, the jury was instructed as follows: ‘You may not sign a verdict imposing a death sentence unless you unanimously vote for it.’ Because the instructions given to the jury concerning unanimity were readily understandable and sufficiently explained the relevant law, we hold that the court did not err in the manner in which it responded to the jury’s inquiry.” Pulliam, 176 Ill. 2d at 285 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Mitigation evidence of a defendant's cognitive abilities and mental health does not preclude imposition of a death sentence when that evidence is outweighed by aggravating evidence.”
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.