This week, we’re reviewing the reversal rates for the Appellate Court in criminal cases since 1990.  First up, the six Divisions of Chicago’s First District of the Appellate Court.

Since 1990, Division One of the First has fared worst, with a reversal rate in criminal cases of 57.14%.  Division Three was next at 56.52%.  The

This week, we’re returning to perhaps the most often-written-about statistics in judicial analytics: reversal rates.  First up, the Divisions of Chicago’s First District of the Appellate Court in civil cases.

The overall numbers for Divisions One through Six are reported in Table 1695.  All six Divisions are relatively close.  The highest reversal rate 1990-2020 was

Now we turn our attention to the criminal docket.  First, we review the data for complete reversal – divided decisions from the Court of Appeal versus unanimous decisions.  In six of the past thirty-one years, the reversal rate for unanimous Court of Appeal decisions has exceeded that for divided ones.  The rest of the time,

Last time, we reviewed the year-by-year percentage of the Supreme Court’s civil caseload that is drawn from Appellate Court cases with a dissenter to evaluate the claim that a petition for leave to appeal from a unanimous decision is a hopeless exercise.  This time, we’re looking at the Court’s criminal cases.  Just like last time,

Last week, we addressed the frequently heard claim that seeking Supreme Court review of an unpublished decision from the Appellate Court is a hopeless task.  This week, we’re addressing a similar claim – that the Supreme Court doesn’t review unanimous decisions.  Below, we’ll address the data from civil cases, and in our next post, we’ll

Last time, we demonstrated that notwithstanding the frequently heard claim that seeking review of a Rule 23 (unpublished) decision from the Appellate Court is a hopeless task, anywhere from ten to forty percent of the Court’s civil docket has consisted of Rule 23 orders for the past thirty years.  So what about criminal cases?

Like most sectors of the bar, there are certain items of “conventional wisdom” in the appellate bar that everyone has heard (or said themselves).  In both Illinois and California, one of those claims is that it’s pointless to seek Supreme Court review of a decision that wasn’t published by the lower court.  After all, if