54 Ill. 2d 377 - People v. Ray’s Empirical Analysis
1973
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 62 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 65 later decisions — most recently December 2011 · most notably 229 Ill. 2d 584 - People v. Naylor (2008), 96 Ill. 2d 176 - People v. McKibbins (1983)
3 federal appellate · 62 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 47 Ill. 2d 510 - The People v. Montgomery · 53 Ill. 2d 485 - People Ex Rel. Walker v. Pate · Aberdeen & Rockfish Railroad v. Students Challenging Regulatory Agency Procedures · The People v. Buford · 3 Ill. App. 3d 517 - People v. Ray
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 65 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(a) General Rule. For the purpose of attacking the credibility of a witness, evidence that he has been convicted of a crime, except on a plea of nolo contendere, is admissible but only if the crime, (1) was punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of one year under the law under which he was convicted, or (2) involved dishonesty or false statement regardless of the punishment unless (3), in either case, the judge determines that the probative value of the evidence of the crime is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. (b) Time limit. Evidence of a conviction under this rule is not admissible if a period of more than 10 years has elapsed since the date of conviction or of the release of the witness from confinement, whichever is the later date.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“it was the settled rule that proof of conviction of an infamous crime was always admissible for the purpose of affecting the credibility of a witness.”
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.