239 Ill. 2d 314 - People v. Stoffel’s Empirical Analysis
2010
Citation profile
39
cited by 39 later decisions
1
states following
February 2026
most recently cited
37 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 216 Ill. 2d 45 - People v. Shellstrom · 216 Ill. 2d 58 - People v. Pearson · 53 Ill. 2d 479 - People Ex Rel. Palmer v. Twomey · 236 Ill. 2d 103 - People v. Swamynathan
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]hen a circuit court is recharacterizing as a first postconviction petition a pleading that a pro se litigant has labeled as a different action cognizable under Illinois law, the circuit court must (1) notify the pro se litigant that the court intends to recharacterize the pleading, (2) warn the litigant that this recharacterization means that any subsequent postconviction petition will be subject to the restrictions on successive postconviction petitions, and (3) provide the litigant an opportunity to withdraw the pleading or to amend it so that it contains all the claims appropriate to a postconviction petition that the litigant believes he or she has. If the court fails to do so, the pleading cannot be considered to have become a postconviction petition for purposes of applying to later pleadings the Act's restrictions on successive postconviction petitions.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. People v. Strickland“"The Shellstrom admonitions are designed to protect the rights of pro se defendants and, in particular, to inform them of the limitation on filing successive postconviction petitions and the need to amend their initial petition to include all possible postconviction claims. [Citation.] But this is precisely the role performed by appointed counsel, who is required to consult with the defendant and make any amendments to the pro se petition that are necessary. [Citations.] Thus, * * * the concerns raised in Shellstrom do not apply when counsel is present [citation], and the absence of admonitions in no way prejudices the defendant." Id.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. People v. Strickland“[W]here * * * a defendant's pro se petition is not summarily dismissed but is instead advanced for further review, and counsel is appointed to represent the defendant, Shellstrom admonitions are unnecessary.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. People v. Strickland
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.