39 Ill. App. 3d 449 - People v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
12 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Napue v. People of the State of Illinois · 53 Ill. 2d 485 - People Ex Rel. Walker v. Pate · 45 Ill. 2d 158 - The People v. Nowak · 51 Ill. 2d 514 - People v. Bracey · 42 Ill. 2d 555 - The PEOPLE v. Green
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““° ° ° A defendant with court-appointed counsel who, on the day a case is set for trial, requests a continuance so he can obtain a lawyer of his choice, must do more than say he is not ready. He must, promptly and with some clarity, give a reason why he wants another lawyer. He must make an ascertainable showing that he, or someone for him, will be able to obtain other counsel. (Compare People v. Green, 42 Ill. 2d 555 , 248 N.E.2d 116 and People v. Payne, supra.) Defendant did not meet these requirements. Therefore, we conclude that refusal to grant defendant’s request for a continuance neither deprived him of the constitutional right to counsel nor due process of law. People v. Tyson (Ill.App.2d), 264 N.E.2d 403 ; People v. Leman, 95 Ill.App.2d 212 , 238 N.E.2d 213 .” ( 2 Ill. App. 3d 1077, 1080 .)”
2 later decisions 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.