36 Ill. App. 3d 577 - People v. Gulley’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

14 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Although a few courts have held that a defendant may be allowed to assert an entrapment defense without being required to concede that he committed the crime charged or any of its elements (see, for example, United States v. Demma, 9 Cir., 523 F.2d 981 ; People v. Perez, 62 Cal. 2d 869 , 44 Cal. Rptr. 326 , 401 P.2d 934 ), the generally accepted rule in Illinois and other jurisdictions is that the defense of entrapment is only available to a defendant who admits committing the acts which constitute the crime for which he is claiming entrapment.” (People v. Gulley (1976), 36 Ill. App. 3d 577, 581 , 344 N.E.2d 567, 571-72 .)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 73 Ill. App. 3d 347 - People v. Bradley

2. ““To determine whether entrapment has been established, a line must be drawn between the trap for the unwary innocent and the trap for the unwary criminal.” Sherman v. United States (1958), 356 U.S. 369, 372 , 2 L. Ed. 2d 848, 851 , 78 S. Ct. 819, 821 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 75 Ill. App. 3d 966 - People v. Wolff

3. “* ° whether entrapment exists is ordinarily a question for determination by the jury, under proper instruction, which determination should not be disturbed on appeal unless the reviewing court concludes that entrapment existed as a matter of law.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 46 Ill. App. 3d 826 - People v. Villanueva