Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 27 ILL2D 184 - People v. Drwal

People v. Drwal’s Empirical Analysis

1963

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
February 2013
most recently cited

1 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Michelson v. United States · Edgington v. United States · Nash v. United States · Petersen v. United States · People v. Rosenbaum

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

  1. ““The judge’s charge as to the character testimony was only that the jury should consider it along with the rest, remembering that a man with a good reputation might still commit crime; and this is challenged under the doctrine of Edgington v. U.S., 164 U.S. 361 . . . . That case [Edgington, supra] held no more than that a judge should not confine the use of such testimony [character testimony] to the event that the jury was already in doubt.” (Italics ours.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.