21 Ill. 2d 425 - The PEOPLE v. Sims’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

57 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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The principle that emerges clearly from all these cases is that the persons who must be called as witnesses or whose absence must be explained are those persons whose testimony would be material on the issue of the voluntary nature of the confession. It is in the light of this principle that defendant’s contention must be examined.” (People v. Sims, 21 Ill. 2d at 432 , 173 N.E.2d at 497 .)”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Bushong v. State · 29 Ill. App. 3d 74 - People v. Burks

2. ““To automatically reverse any conviction without even looking at the evidence upon which the trial judge made his finding of voluntariness because all material witnesses were not called or their absence explained, places form above substance. If the present rule insured any degree of certainty as to a proper determination of the voluntariness of a confession, it would merit the position it now holds. I believe, however, that justice has been averted on many occasions by its application. It has been stated that the rule is not a mechanical one but a practical one designed to assist the trial court in determining whether the confession was involuntary. [Citation.] The cases do not, however, support this statement, nor can they because of the inherent nature of the rule.” (People v. Sims (1961), 21 Ill. 2d 425, 433-35 (House, J., specially concurring, joined by Bristow and Klingbiel, JJ.).)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 155 Ill. 2d 122 - People v. R.D.