55 Ill. App. 3d 21 - People v. Abbott’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
35 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently March 1991 · most notably 94 Ill. 2d 327 - People v. Szabo (1983), 62 Ill. App. 3d 847 - People v. Driver (1978)
35 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 United States v. Carlton E. Bryant, United States of America v. William E. Turner · 19 Ill. App. 3d 365 - People v. Manley · 15 Ill. App. 3d 125 - People v. Ohley · 29 Ill. App. 3d 873 - People v. Rand · 40 Ill. App. 3d 753 - People v. Parton
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The prosecution’s duty to preserve evidence was well-stated in United States v. Bryant (D.C. Cir. 1971), 439 F.2d 642 , where the court stated: ‘The purpose of the duty is not simply to correct an imbalance of advantage, whereby the prosecution may surprise the defense at trial with new evidence; rather, it is also to make of the trial a search for truth informed by all relevant material, much of which, because of imbalance in investigative resources, will be exclusively in the hands of the Government.’ ( 439 F.2d 642, 648 .) One use of such statements and memoranda is to test the witness’ credibility at trial. (People v. DeStefano (1975), 30 Ill. App. 3d 935, 943 , 332 N.E.2d 626 .) While we have found that our rules of discovery do not require a prosecutor to reduce all of his witnesses’ pretrial statements to written memoranda and that defense counsel should not rely on the State to prepare a case for the defense, we will not condone intentional tactics taken by the State to preclude discovery of relevant material. The police and prosecutor are primarily engaged in a quest for truth when they investigate allegations of criminal activity. Any attempt to avoid the disclosure of evidence casts an ominous shadow over our entire system of law enforcement including its investigative, prosecutorial, and judicial branches. On occasion, such tactics might result in the conviction of an innocent man, although we are confident that that did not occur in the instant case. What might ”
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.