Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 202 Ill. 2d 189 - People v. Pollock

202 Ill. 2d 189 - People v. Pollock’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

173
cited by 173 later decisions
3
states following
March 2026
most recently cited

167 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 173 later decisions — most recently March 2026 · most notably 225 Ill. 2d 551 - People v. Piatkowski (2007), 212 Ill. 2d 274 - People v. Cunningham (2004)

167 state decisions

760200220102020decided

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 195 Ill. 2d 336 - People v. Maggette · 193 Ill. 2d 272 - People v. Kotlarz

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

  1. “When considering whether defendant aided or abetted Macalia Blackburn in the crime of felony child abuse murder, you may consider whether defendant knew of a serious and immediate threat to the welfare of Marcel[la Yellowbear and failed to act to protect Marcel{lla Yellowbear from that harm. That is, whether there is evidence from which it can be inferred that the defendant knew that Marcel{lla Yel-lowbear was sustaining injury and, based on the severity of the injuries being sustained, knew that there was a substantial risk that death or great bodily injury would result if the defendant did not act to protect Marcel[l]a Yellowhear. Parents are required to intercede on their child's behalf and, if they fail to act, they risk being held responsible for the other person's criminal conduct. By failing to act, the parent may be deemed to have implicitly sanctioned the criminal behavior and, therefore, may be held accountable for the abusive conduct. Even in situations where the parent is not present at the time when the abuse resulting in death takes place, the parent may be held accountable for the criminal conduct resulting in death, if it is proved that the parent knew that the child had been abused by the principal in the past and, because of the nature of previous injuries sustained by the child, also knew there was a substantial risk of serious harm, yet took no action to protect the child from future injury by the abuser.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.