197 Ill. 2d 166 - People v. Bolden’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

25 state decisions

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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Decisions of this court have long understood the search and seizure clause of article I, section 6, to command an interpretation like the one that is given to the corresponding provision of the fourth amendment. [Citations.] While the privacy clause of article I, section 6, possesses a unique constitutional history, it is of no assistance here to the defendant, for it is a separate guarantee and does not serve to transform the nearby search and seizure clause into a source of constitutional rights that are more extensive than those conferred by the fourth amendment.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 354 Ill. App. 3d 57 - People v. Butler

2. “`construe Krueger as suggesting that the search and seizure clause of article I, section 6, of the Illinois Constitution must be interpreted more expansively than the corresponding right found in the fourth amendment. The exclusionary rule is a judicially created remedy * * * [citation].'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 398 Ill. App. 3d 975 - People v. Glorioso

3. “[r]ecognizing both the importance of this issue and our obligation to maintain a sound and consistent body of case law.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 224 Ill. 2d 88 - Board of Trustees v. Illinois Labor Relations Board