51 Ill. App. 3d 751 - People v. Douthit’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
16
cited by 16 later decisions
3
cited 3 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
March 1988
most recently cited
10 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Washington v. Texas · United States v. Rabinowitz · Williams v. Florida · Wardius v. Oregon · 54 Ill. 2d 280 - People v. Pickett
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Despite appellate counsel's excellent brief on the issue of the constitutionality, as applied to a criminal defendant of that portion of Supreme Court Rule 415(g)(i) (Ill.Rev.Stat.1975, ch. 110A, par. 415(g)(i)) authorizing exclusion of evidence for failure to comply with a discovery rule, we deem that issue, raised for the first time on appeal, to have been waived. There is nothing in the record to indicate that defense counsel ever raised any constitutional objection during the extensive in-chambers discussion summarized above, nor did he do so in his post-trial motion, which requests a new trial solely on the ground that '[t]he court erred in ruling that the defendant could not call Glen Muench and Rocky Reed to testify to defendant's state of intoxication at the time of the commission of the alleged burglary.' As we read this motion, it raises only the nonconstitutional question whether the trial court abused its discretion in exercising the exclusion sanction. Failure to raise an issue, including a constitutional issue, in the written motion for a new trial constitutes waiver of that issue and it cannot be urged as a ground for reversal on review.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Taylor v. Illinois“Subject to constitutional limitations and within a reasonable time after the filing of a written motion by the State, defense counsel shall inform the State of any defenses which he intends to make at a hearing or trial and shall furnish the State with the following material and information within his possession or control:”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Taylor v. Illinois“defense counsel . . . shall furnish the State with . . . the names and last known addresses of persons he intends to call as witnesses. . . .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Taylor v. Illinois
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.