66 Ill. 2d 276 - People v. Knippenberg’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
70 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 74 later decisions — most recently October 2024 · most notably 47 Cal. 4th 745 - People v. Ervine (2009), 129 Ill. 2d 321 - People v. Coleman (1989)
70 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 Chapman v. State of California · Glasser v. United States · Escobedo v. Illinois · Harrington v. California · Weatherford v. Bursey
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 74 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“`The question is whether there is a reasonable possibility that the evidence complained of might have contributed to the conviction.'”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"It has never been questioned that the privilege protects communications to the attorney's clerks and his other agents (including stenographers) for rendering his services. The assistance of these agents being indispensable to his work and the communications of the client being often necessarily committed to them by the attorney or by the client himself, the privilege must include all the persons who act as the attorney's agents."”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"What occurred here was violative of the notion of a fair trial and completely offensive to the concept of the effective assistance of counsel. The prejudice to the defendant was grave and inexcusable. Under the sixth amendment an accused has the right to effective assistance of counsel, which is applicable to State criminal proceedings through the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment. ( Escobedo v. Illinois, 378 U.S. 478 , 84 S.Ct. 1758 , 12 L.Ed.2d 977 [(1964)].) It has been observed that the `essence of the Sixth Amendment right is * * * privacy of communication with counsel.' United States v. Rosner, (2d Cir.1973) 485 F.2d 1213, 1224 ." Knippenberg, 66 Ill.2d at 285 , 6 Ill.Dec. 46 , 362 N.E.2d 681 .”
2 later decisions 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.