People v. Joya’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently October 2025
21 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 122 Ill. 2d 176 - People v. Enoch · 136 Ill. 2d 27 - People v. Reid · 146 Ill. 2d 363 - People v. Campbell · 141 Ill. 2d 40 - People v. Smith · 191 Ill. 2d 37 - In Re GO
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"[T]he only evidence that there was any connection between defendant's gang membership and the shooting of [the victim] was * * * testimony that, two or three months prior to the shooting, defendant told him that he was a member of the Viking street gang. The evidence in this case showed that the incident was a bar fight and there was absolutely no testimony that anyone mentioned gang involvement in the shooting either prior to or after the shooting. As to the State's argument that the evidence of gang affiliation established a common purpose or design between defendant and his fellow gang members, we note that the shooter, Pedro, was defendant's brother. The familial relationship between the two is a more reasonable basis upon which to find a common purpose or design. * * * Consequently, any inference that their mutual gang membership supported the State's theory that they acted in concert was cumulative and unnecessary. We find that the evidence of gang membership in this case was not related to the crime charged and that if it had any probative value at all, such value was greatly outweighed by its prejudicial effect. We find that the trial court abused its discretion in admitting the evidence of defendant's gang membership * * *." (Emphasis added.) Id. at 377, 253 Ill. Dec. 158 , 744 N.E.2d 891 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the only evidence that there was any connection between [the] defendant's gang membership and the shooting of [the victim] was * * * testimony that, two or three months prior to the shooting, [the] defendant told [a witness] that he [ (the defendant) ] was a member of [a] street gang.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. People v. Davis“evidence of defendant's gang membership was relevant to show that defendant and his fellow gang members shared a common purpose or design,”
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.