316 Ill. App. 3d 874 - People v. Sutton’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
24
cited by 24 later decisions
1
states following
January 2018
most recently cited
24 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 122 Ill. 2d 176 - People v. Enoch · Medina v. California · United States v. Zolin · 79 Ill. 2d 564 - People v. Carlson · 145 Ill. 2d 353 - People v. Illgen
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'[t]he assistant [S]tate's [A]ttorney made prejudicial, inflammatory and erroneous statements in closing argument designed to arouse the prejudices and passions of the jury thereby prejudicing the defendant's right to a fair trial,' was too general to have alerted the court to the proposed error that defendant now argues on appeal.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. People v. Anaya“[w]here there are allegations of prosecutorial misconduct [during closing], arguments of both the prosecutor and defense counsel must be reviewed in their entirety”
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.