Yesterday, we discussed the distribution of majority opinions in civil cases at the Illinois Supreme Court between 2005 and 2009. Today, we turn to the distribution of majorities in criminal cases during the same years.
For 2005, non-unanimous majorities in criminal cases were evenly spread among the Justices, with Chief Justice McMorrow and Justices Garman,
Last week, we began our review of the individual Justices’ work on the Illinois Supreme Court. We started with a look at how authorship of majority opinions was distributed year by year between 2000 and 2004. Today, we turn to majority opinions in civil cases between 2005 and 2009.
In Table 364 below, we report
Yesterday, we began our analysis of the work of the individual Justices at the Illinois Supreme Court by analyzing the distribution of majority opinions in civil cases between 2000 and 2004. Today, we turn our attention to the Court’s criminal docket during those same years.
Between 2000 and 2002, the non-unanimous majority opinions in criminal
Today, we begin a new phase of our analysis of the Illinois Supreme Court’s recent history, as we turn our attention to the work of the individual Justices. Over the next two months, we’ll be assessing how influential individual Justices appear to be in swaying the Court to their point of view. First up: have
For the past two weeks, we’ve been reviewing the Illinois Supreme Court’s recent history with amicus briefs. Today, we turn our attention to the criminal and quasi-criminal docket between 2008 and 2015.
Amicus briefs were far more common in civil cases than in criminal matters between 2008 and 2015 – just as was the case
Last week, we began our examination of the Illinois Supreme Court’s experience since 2000 with amicus briefs, analyzing the years 2000 through 2007 on both the civil and criminal side of the docket. This week, we’ll turn our attention to the Court’s experience between 2008 and 2015.
In Table 352 below, we report the total
Yesterday, we began our review of the Illinois Supreme Court’s experience with amicus briefs with the data for civil cases between 2000 and 2007.
Amicus briefs were far less common on the criminal side of the docket during these early years of our period. The Court accepted three amicus briefs in non-unanimous criminal decisions in
Last week, we completed our review of the Illinois Supreme Court’s dissents between 2000 and 2016. Today, we begin our analysis of the Supreme Court’s amicus briefs.
We report total amicus briefs in civil cases in Table 348 below. The Court accepted 16 amicus briefs in non-unanimous decisions in 2000, 15 in 2001 and 15
Yesterday, we began our examination of trends in the Illinois Supreme Court’s civil and criminal dissents. We discovered that dissents were at an extremely high level on the criminal side, and somewhat elevated on the civil side, but have settled down in the years since. The average length of the civil and criminal dissents started
This week, we conclude our analysis of trends in the length of the Court’s opinions with a look at the Justices’ dissents.
First, let’s turn to the most fundamental question – just how common are dissents? The data reported in Table 345 is not total cases in which at least one dissent was filed, which