59 Ill. App. 3d 480 - People v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 44 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently April 2001 · most notably 183 Ill. 2d 366 - People v. Coleman (1998), 72 Ill. App. 3d 445 - People v. Kellas (1979)
2 federal appellate · 44 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 68 Ill. 2d 149 - People v. Perruquet · 67 Ill. 2d 564 - People v. Manion · North Carolina v. Wrenn · Dennis v. California · Lefkowitz v. Newsome
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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“” e the admission of hearsay identification testimony constitutes reversible error only when used as a substitute for in-court identification or when introduced to strengthen and corroborate a weak identification. If the hearsay testimony is merely cumulative [citations], or is supported by a positive identification and other corroborative circumstances [citation], it constitutes harmless error [citation]. It has further been held that if the person who made the out-of-court identification is present, testifies to his prior identification and is subject to cross-examination, the purpose of the hearsay rule is satisfied, [citation.]” ( 59 Ill. App. 3d 480, 489-90 .)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““Although these statements could be construed as exculpatory, a negative inference tending to establish guilt can likewise be drawn. [Citation.] Thus, as the admission instruction admonishes, it was for the jury to determine the weight to be given these statements.””
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.