371 Ill. App. 3d 948 - People v. Phillips’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
27 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently December 2020 · most notably 233 Ill. 2d 62 - People v. Patrick (2009), 381 Ill. App. 3d 1001 - People v. Averett (2008)
27 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 Strickland v. Washington · Old Chief v. United States · Rock v. Arkansas · Luce v. United States · 47 Ill. 2d 510 - The People v. Montgomery
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"We cannot fathom what more the judge needed in order to conduct the balancing test and rule on the admissibility of the prior convictions. The defendant was deprived of the information he needed to make an informed and intelligent decision about whether to testify." Phillips, 371 Ill.App.3d at 952 , 309 Ill.Dec. 582 , 864 N.E.2d 823 .”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““There may be times when a trial court cannot effectively conduct the Montgomery balancing test without hearing the defendant’s direct testimony, although it is difficult to envision that happening with any frequency. In most cases, as was true in this case, the judge will have heard enough or been told enough to find the issue ripe for decision.” Phillips, 371 Ill. App. 3d at 952-53 , 864 N.E.2d at 828 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ ‘ “the nature of the prior crimes, *** the length of the criminal record, the age and circumstances of the defendant, and, above all, the extent to which it is more important to the search for truth in a particular case for the jury to hear the defendant’s story than to know of a prior conviction.” ’ ” Montgomery, 47 Ill. 2d at 518 , quoting 51 F.R.D. 315 , 393 (1971), quoting Luck v. United States, 348 F.2d 763, 769 (D.C. Cir. 1965).”
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.