211 Ill. 2d 395 - People v. Santos’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
89 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 95 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2026 · most notably 375 Ill. App. 3d 966 - People v. Bobo (2007), 356 Ill. App. 3d 462 - In Re Marriage of Lindman (2005)
89 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 Chambers v. Mississippi · Pointer v. Texas · California v. Trombetta · Crane v. Kentucky · 106 Ill. 2d 237 - People v. Collins
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 95 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"In prosecutions for predatory criminal sexual assault of a child [720 ILCS 5/12-14.1 (West 2004)] * * * the prior sexual activity or the reputation of the alleged victim * * * is inadmissible except (1) as evidence concerning the past sexual conduct of the alleged victim * * * with the accused when this evidence is offered by the accused upon the issue of whether the alleged victim * * * consented to the sexual conduct with respect to which the offense is alleged; or (2) when constitutionally required to be admitted." 725 ILCS 5/115-7(a) (West 2004).”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. People v. Bates · People v. Freeman““What defendant wished to do by introducing this evidence was to impeach the victim’s credibility with a specific act of untruthfulness. He wished to show the jury that T.K. had lied on one occasion — when she told medical personnel she had not had sexual intercourse with anyone else in the previous 72 hours — in order to support his argument that when she testified in court she was lying about what had occurred between her and the defendant. Far from being constitutionally required, specific-act impeachment is prohibited in Illinois.” (Emphasis in original.) Santos, 211 Ill. 2d at 403-04 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[w]hether [the victim] had, unbeknownst to defendant, engaged in sexual relations with someone else is wholly unrelated to the question of whether defendant reasonably believed that [the victim] was of age when the act of sexual penetration took place, which was the only controverted issue on this charge”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. People v. Freeman
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.