215 Ill. 2d 283 - People v. Durr’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
105 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 107 later decisions — most recently January 2026 · most notably 237 Ill. 2d 539 - People v. Hillier (2010), 228 Ill. 2d 200 - Cinkus v. Village of Stickney Municipal Officers Electoral Board (2008)
105 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 215 Ill. 2d 167 - People v. Herron · 189 Ill. 2d 99 - People v. Blue · 169 Ill. 2d 1 - People v. Keene · 193 Ill. 2d 306 - People v. Williams · 203 Ill. 2d 335 - People v. Crespo
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 107 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"We have repeatedly held that `we can review any question not otherwise properly preserved if we believe that plain error affecting a substantial right may have occurred.' (Emphasis added.) People v. Shaw, 186 Ill.2d 301, 326 [ 239 Ill.Dec. 311 , 713 N.E.2d 1161 ] (1998). We have reviewed alleged instructional errors under the plain-error doctrine, as affecting substantial rights, even though we have ultimately concluded that `any instructional error was [not] so substantial that it reflected on the fairness of the trial.' People v. Williams, 181 Ill.2d 297, 317-20 [ 229 Ill.Dec. 898 , 692 N.E.2d 1109 ] (1998). Indeed, `to determine whether a purported error is "plain" requires a substantive look at it. But if, in the end, the error is found not to rise to the level of a plain error * * *, the procedural default must be honored.' Keene, 169 Ill.2d at 17 [ 214 Ill.Dec. 194 , 660 N.E.2d 901 ]." Durr, 215 Ill.2d at 298 , 294 Ill.Dec. 115 , 830 N.E.2d 527 .”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'creates a serious risk that the jurors incorrectly convicted the defendant because they did not understand the applicable law, so as to severely threaten the fairness of the trial.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that the defendant has proved by clear and convincing evidence that he is not guilty by reason of insanity of First Degree Murder (or Attempt First Degree Murder) your deliberations should end, and you should return the verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity of First Degree Murder (or Attempt First Degree Murder). If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that the defendant has not proved by clear and convincing evidence that he is not guilty by reason of insanity of First Degree Murder (or Attempt First Degree Murder), then you should continue your deliberations to determine whether the defendant is guilty but mentally ill of First Degree Murder (or Attempt First Degree Murder)."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. People v. Smith
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.