333 Ill. App. 3d 43 - People v. Brazee’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

21 state decisions

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.

1. ““We can see no reason why the General Assembly would intend to attach the stigma and legal consequences of a criminal conviction merely because the minor at one time stood charged with a more serious offense. We therefore conclude that, when the charge or charges enumerated in section 5 — 4(6) (a) have been resolved in the minor’s favor, he or she is no longer excluded from the definition of ‘delinquent minor.’ We further conclude that, by validating the criminal prosecution and verdict, section 5 — 4(6)(c)(ii) merely eliminates the need to retry the defendant in a formal delinquency hearing.” Brazee II, 333 Ill. App. 3d at 48 .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 357 Ill. App. 3d 45 - People v. Mathis · People v. King

2. “In enacting section [5-130(1)(c)(ii)], however, the General Assembly obviously recognized the injustice of criminalizing a minor's less serious delinquent behavior when the particular charges mandating criminal prosecution are resolved in the minor's favor.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. People v. King

3. “unless the State requests a hearing for the purpose of sentencing the minor under [c]hapter V of the [Unified Code], the [c]ourt must proceed under [s]ections 5-705 and 5-710 of [the Act].”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. People v. King