78 Ill. 2d 477 - People v. Tipton’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
90 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 90 later decisions — most recently June 2021 · most notably 98 Ill. 2d 294 - People v. Bartall (1983), 7 Cal. 4th 414 - People v. Balcom (1994)
90 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 Sorrells v. United States · Sherman v. United States · 5 Ill. 2d 337 - People v. Lehman · United States v. Daniels · 77 Ill. 2d 396 - People v. Cross
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 90 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“‘A person is not guilty of an offense if his conduct is incited or induced by a public officer or employee, or agent of either, for the purpose of obtaining evidence for the prosecution of such person. However, this section is inapplicable if a public officer or employee, or agent of either, merely affords to such person the opportunity or facility for committing an offense in furtherance of a criminal purpose which such person has originated.’ (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1975, ch. 38, par. 7-12.) It thus contemplates consideration of whether the idea for the crime originated with the defendant; predisposition as well as governmental involvement must therefore be considered.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““Once the entrapment defense is raised, it becomes incumbent upon the State to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that entrapment did not occur. (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1975, ch. 38, par. 3 — 2(b); People v. Dollen (1972), 53 Ill. 2d 280, 284 .) The question of entrapment in a jury trial, however, is usually one for the jury, unless the trial court or a reviewing court can find entrapment as a matter of law.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““[E]vidence of subsequent acts is admissible if relevant to the issue of predisposition of the defendant to commit the offense charged; relevancy is measured in terms of similarity and proximity in time.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Schoenhals
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.