65 Ill. App. 2d 23 - People v. Wright’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

53 state decisions

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 53 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““In the case at bar the defendant’s connection with the crime rests upon the identification of a single witness. The testimony of the police officers with regard to the identification of defendant by [complainant] was incompetent as hearsay. The error in admitting the testimony was further amplified by the prosecutor referring to it in his argument to the jury. See People v. Reeves, 360 Ill. 55, 64 , 195 N.E. 443 . The probative value of the officers’ testimony is not enhanced by the fact that it was received without objection. People v. Harrison, 25 Ill. 2d 407, 414 , 185 N.E.2d 244 . Nor can the error in admitting the testimony be regarded as harmless in view of the fact that defendant was identified by but one witness. Such testimony might have bolstered the identification and might have given the effect of corroboration. ” * *” 65 Ill. App. 2d 23, 34 , 212 N.E.2d 126, 131 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. People v. Duncan

2. ““An evasive answer, or one unresponsive to the declaration, can be tantamount to absolute silence, and when not amounting to a denial, renders admissible both the statement and the reply under the rule as to tacit admissions.” 65 Ill. App. 2d 23, 32 , 212 N.E.2d 126, 130 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 44 Ill. App. 3d 459 - People v. Morgan