372 Ill. App. 3d 112 - People v. Jackson’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
14 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 145 Ill. 2d 353 - People v. Illgen · 103 Ill. 2d 226 - People v. Tisler · 196 Ill. 2d 425 - People v. Sorenson · 145 Ill. 2d 441 - People v. Thingvold · 214 Ill. 2d 318 - People v. Bush
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.
““Q. Did you develop a DNA profile from that stain from the toilet bowl? A.Yes, I did. Q. Was that profile consistent with the DNA profile of Doris Jackson? A. No, it was not. Q. Were you able to determine the gender of the profile from the stains that did not match Doris Jackson, those being from the toilet and the tub? A. Yes. Q. And was that a male or female profile? A. Male. Q. And what did you do with that profile from the tub and the toilet? A. The profiles were uploaded into what is called a data base. Q. And did you get any results from putting that profile into a data base? A. Yes. I ended up obtaining a match. Q. And did that match give you the name of any particular person? A. It gave me a reference number from which I would need to call down to Springfield and give to the codus [sic] administrator, the data base administrator, and they would look up the reference number to who it hit to. Q. What was the name of that person? A. Lewis Jackson. Q. And again, I don’t think I asked this question, but did the stain from the tub and the stain from the toilet bowl, were those the same DNA profile? A. Yes. Q. After you got the results from the computer data base, what did you do? Did you telephone anyone? A. I telephoned codus [sic] data base administrator in Springfield. Q. When you got the match did you contact the State’s Attorney’s Office? A. Yes, I did. Q. Did you request anything? A. I requested an additional standard from Lewis Jackson. Q. An additional standard like”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““Probable cause exists when the totality of the facts and circumstances known to the officers is such that a reasonably prudent person would believe that the suspect is committing or has committed a crime. [Citations.] Whether probable cause is present is governed by common-sense considerations [citations], and the calculation concerns ‘[t]he probability of criminal activity, rather than proof beyond a reasonable doubt.’ ” People v. Montgomery, 112 Ill. 2d 517, 525 , 494 N.E.2d 475, 477-78 (1986), quoting People v. Tisler, 103 Ill. 2d 226, 236 , 469 N.E.2d 147, 152 (1984).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““[T]he collection and storage of DNA as a means of identifying individuals is a relatively new process and is not widespread. In the future, as DNA is used for identification of individuals in more and more areas, and as the public becomes generally aware of those uses, a different rule might obtain.” 327 Ill. App. 3d at 124.”
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.