People v. Robinson, 719 N.E.2d 662 (Ill. 1999). · Go Syfert
Search
People v. Robinson, 719 N.E.2d 662 (Ill. 1999). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 5× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 2006 · …the purpose of criminal prosecutions is to punish the defendant; continuing criminal proceedings when the defendant is dead is a useless act at p. 663 ✓
cited 3× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 2002 · …the purpose of criminal prosecutions is to punish the defendant; continuing criminal proceedings when the page 919 defendant is dead is a useless act at p. 534 ✓
cited 3× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 2004 · …the rule adopted by this court . . . recognizes that the purpose of criminal prosecutions is to punish the defendant; continuing criminal proceedings when the defendant is dead is a useless act. at p. 534 ✓
161 citation events (159 in the last 25 years) across 14 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Bamonte v. Charatan (nysd, 2023-03-31) · Strongest negative: Howard Payton v. State of Mississippi (miss, 2019-03-21)
Treatment trajectory · 2000 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2000 2013 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 34 distinct citers. How cited ↗
examined Vacated Howard Payton v. State of Mississippi (4×)
Miss. · 2019 · confidence high
Likewise, the Alabama Supreme Court rejected abatement ab initio , noting its constitutional and statutory protections for victims of crime and "the callous impact [abatement ab initio ] necessarily has on the surviving victims of violent crime." Wheat v. State , 907 So.2d 461 , 463 (Ala. 2005) (emphasis omitted) (quoting People v. Robinson , 298 Ill.App.3d 866 , 232 Ill.Dec. 901 , 699 N.E.2d 1086 , 1091 (1998), judgment vacated by People v. Robinson , 187 Ill.2d 461 , 241 Ill.Dec. 533 , 719 N.E.2d 662 , 663 (1999) ).
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Bamonte v. Charatan
S.D.N.Y. · 2023 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
hen a defendant dies while his direct appeal is pending before the appellate court, all of the criminal proceedings abate ab initio, from their inception.
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) State v. Isaak
N.D. · 2023 · signal: see, e.g. · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
a defendant's conviction abates ab initio if defendant dies while his direct appeal is pending
examined Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Surland v. State (9×) also: Cited as authority (quoted), Cited "see"
Md. · 2006 · signal: see · quote attribution · 5 verbatim quotes · confidence high
the purpose of criminal prosecutions is to punish the defendant; continuing criminal proceedings when the defendant is dead is a useless act
examined Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Wheat v. State (3×) also: Cited as authority (quoted)
Ala. Crim. App. · 2004 · quote attribution · 3 verbatim quotes · confidence high
the rule adopted by this court . . . recognizes that the purpose of criminal prosecutions is to punish the defendant; continuing criminal proceedings when the defendant is dead is a useless act.
examined Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Ex Parte Estate of Cook (3×) also: Cited as authority (quoted)
Ala. · 2002 · quote attribution · 3 verbatim quotes · confidence high
the purpose of criminal prosecutions is to punish the defendant; continuing criminal proceedings when the page 919 defendant is dead is a useless act
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Coleman v. East Joliet Fire Protection District (2×)
Ill. · 2016 · confidence medium
However, we have consistently held that any departure from stare decisis must be specially justified (Chicago Bar Ass’n, 161 Ill. 2d at 510 ) and that prior decisions should not be overruled absent “good cause” (Moehle, 93 Ill. 2d at 304 ; Heimgaertner v. Benjamin Electric Manufacturing Co., 6 Ill. 2d 152, 166-67 (1955)) or “compelling reasons” (Moehle, 93 Ill. 2d at 304 ; People v. Robinson, 187 Ill. 2d 461, 463-64 (1999)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Coleman v. East Joliet Fire Protection District (2×)
Ill. · 2016 · confidence medium
However, we have consistently held that any departure from stare decisis must be specially justified (Chicago Bar Ass’n, 161 Ill. 2d at 510 ) and that prior decisions should not be overruled absent “good cause” (Moehle, 93 Ill. 2d at 304 ; Heimgaertner v. Benjamin Electric Manufacturing Co., 6 Ill. 2d 152, 166-67 (1955)) or “compelling reasons” (Moehle, 93 Ill. 2d at 304 ; People v. Robinson, 187 Ill. 2d 461, 463-64 (1999)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) State v. Burrell
Minn. · 2013 · confidence medium
June 9, 2011); People v. Robinson, 187 Ill.2d 461 , 241 Ill.Dec. 533 , 719 N.E.2d 662, 664 (1999); O’Sullivan v. People, 144 Ill. 604 , 32 N.E. 192, 194 (1892); State v. Kriechbaum, 219 Iowa 457 , 258 N.W. 110, 113 (1934); State v. Morris, 328 So.2d 65, 67 (La.1976); State v. Carter, 299 A.2d 891, 895 (Me.1973); Commonwealth v. Eisen, 368 Mass. 813 , 334 N.E.2d 14, 14 (1975); State v. Forrester, 579 S.W.2d 421, 421 (Mo.Ct.App.1979); State v. Campbell, 187 Neb. 719 , 193 N.W.2d 571, 572 (1972); State v. Poulos, 97 N.H. 352 , 88 A.2d 860, 861 (1952); People v. Matteson, 75 N.Y.2d 745 , 551 N.Y…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Nationwide Advantage Mortgage Company v. Ortiz
Ill. App. Ct. · 2012 · confidence medium
Compelling reasons may require a court to depart from prior precedent; however, this does not apply in cases where the court is merely of “the opinion that it might decide otherwise were the question a new one.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) People v. Robinson, 187 Ill. 2d 461, 463-64 (1999).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Suarez
Ill. · 2007 · confidence medium
However, we have consistently held that any departure from stare decisis must be specially justified (Chicago Bar Ass’n, 161 Ill. 2d at 510 ) and that prior decisions should not be overruled absent “good cause” (Moehle, 93 Ill. 2d at 304 ; Heimgaertner v. Benjamin Electric Manufacturing Co., 6 Ill. 2d 152, 166-67 (1955)) or “compelling reasons” (Moehle, 93 Ill. 2d at 304 ; People v. Robinson, 187 Ill. 2d 461, 463-64 (1999)). *** In sum, “when a rule of law has once been settled, contravening no statute or constitutional principle, such rule ought to be followed unless it can be sho…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Suarez
Ill. · 2007 · confidence medium
However, we have consistently held that any departure from stare decisis must be specially justified (Chicago Bar Ass’n, 161 Ill. 2d at 510 ) and that prior decisions should not be overruled absent “good cause” (Moehle, 93 Ill. 2d at 304 ; Heimgaertner v. Benjamin Electric Manufacturing Co., 6 Ill. 2d 152, 166-67 (1955)) or “compelling reasons” (Moehle, 93 Ill. 2d at 304 ; People v. Robinson, 187 Ill. 2d 461, 463-64 (1999)). *** In sum, “when a rule of law has once been settled, contravening no statute or constitutional principle, such rule ought to be followed unless it can be sho…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Klebanowski
Ill. · 2006 · confidence medium
In light of the thorough review of the proximate cause theory of liability contained in Dekens, the recency of the decision, and principles of stare decisis (see People v. Robinson, 187 Ill. 2d 461, 464 (1999); Pasquale v. Speed Products Engineering, 166 Ill. 2d 337, 349 (1995)), we determine also that the proximate cause theory of liability is the theory applicable to the case at bar.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Klebanowski
Ill. · 2006 · confidence medium
In light of the thorough review of the proximate cause theory of liability contained in Dekens, the recency of the decision, and principles of stare decisis (see People v. Robinson, 187 Ill. 2d 461, 464 (1999); Pasquale v. Speed Products Engineering, 166 Ill. 2d 337, 349 (1995)), we determine also that the proximate cause theory of liability is the theory applicable to the case at bar.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Sharpe
Ill. · 2005 · confidence medium
However, we have consistently held that any departure from stare decisis must be specially justified (Chicago Bar Ass’n, 161 Ill. 2d at 510 ) and that prior decisions should not be overruled absent ‘good cause’ (Moehle, 93 Ill. 2d at 304 ; Heimgaertner v. Benjamin Electric Manufacturing Co., 6 Ill. 2d 152, 166-67 (1955)) or ‘compelling reasons’ (Moehle, 93 Ill. 2d at 304 ; People v. Robinson, 187 Ill. 2d 461, 463-64 (1999)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Sharpe
Ill. · 2005 · confidence medium
However, we have consistently held that any departure from stare decisis must be specially justified ( Chicago Bar Ass’n , 161 Ill. 2d at 510 ) and that prior decisions should not be overruled absent ‘good cause’ ( Moehle , 93 Ill. 2d at 304 ; Heimgaertner v. Benjamin Electric Manufacturing Co. , 6 Ill. 2d 152, 166-67 (1955)) or ‘compelling reasons’ ( Moehle , 93 Ill. 2d at 304 ; People v. Robinson , 187 Ill. 2d 461, 463-64 (1999)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Scachitti v. UBS Financial Services
Ill. · 2005 · confidence medium
People v. Robinson, 187 Ill. 2d 461, 463-64 (1999); Moehle v. Chrysler Motors Corp., 93 Ill. 2d 299, 304 (1982).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Scachitti v. UBS Financial Services
Ill. · 2005 · confidence medium
People v. Robinson , 187 Ill. 2d 461, 463-64 (1999); Moehle v. Chrysler Motors Corp. , 93 Ill. 2d 299, 304 (1982).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Ex Parte State
Ala. · 2005 · confidence medium
Although the Illinois Supreme Court in People v. Robinson, 187 Ill.2d 461 , 719 N.E.2d 662 , 241 Ill.Dec. 533 *463 (1999), reversed the judgment of the intermediate appellate court and vacated the convictions on the ground that caselaw from 1978 [1] holding that all criminal proceedings abate ab initio when a defendant dies while an appeal is pending made any change in the law a legislative matter, the intermediate court's discussion about trends in the various states is instructive.
cited Cited as authority (rule) People v. Ehlert
Ill. · 2004 · confidence medium
People v. Robinson, 187 Ill. 2d 461, 463-64 (1999); Moehle v. Chrysler Motors Corp., 93 Ill. 2d 299, 304 (1982).
cited Cited as authority (rule) People v. Ehlert
Ill. · 2004 · confidence medium
People v. Robinson , 187 Ill. 2d 461, 463-64 (1999); Moehle v. Chrysler Motors Corp. , 93 Ill. 2d 299, 304 (1982).
examined Cited as authority (rule) Vitro v. Mihelcic (5×) also: Cited "see"
Ill. · 2004 · confidence medium
However, we have consistently held that any departure from stare decisis must be specially justified (Chicago Bar Ass’n, 161 Ill. 2d at 510 ) and that prior decisions should not be overruled absent “good cause” (Moehle, 93 Ill. 2d at 304 ; Heimgaertner v. Benjamin Electric Manufacturing Co., 6 Ill. 2d 152, 166-67 (1955)) or “compelling reasons” (Moehle, 93 Ill. 2d at 304 ; People v. Robinson, 187 Ill. 2d 461, 463-64 (1999)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Vitro v. Mihelcic (2×) also: Cited "see"
Ill. · 2004 · confidence medium
However, we have consistently held that any departure from stare decisis must be specially justified ( Chicago Bar Ass’n , 161 Ill. 2d at 510 ) and that prior decisions should not be overruled absent “good cause” ( Moehle , 93 Ill. 2d at 304 ; Heimgaertner v. Benjamin Electric Manufacturing Co. , 6 Ill. 2d 152, 166-67 (1955)) or “compelling reasons” ( Moehle , 93 Ill. 2d at 304 ; People v. Robinson , 187 Ill. 2d 461, 463-64 (1999)).
examined Cited as authority (rule) People v. Jones (5×) also: Cited "see"
Ill. · 2003 · confidence medium
It is well established that prior precedent should be overruled “only on the showing of good cause” (Heimgaertner v. Benjamin Electric Manufacturing Co., 6 Ill. 2d 152, 167 (1955)) and only where there are “compelling reasons” for the departure (People v. Robinson, 187 Ill. 2d 461, 463-64 (1999)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Jones (2×) also: Cited "see"
Ill. · 2003 · confidence medium
It is well established that prior precedent should be overruled “only on the showing of good cause” ( Heimgaertner v. Benjamin Electric Manufacturing Co. , 6 Ill. 2d 152, 167 (1955)) and only where there are “compelling reasons” for the departure ( People v. Robinson , 187 Ill. 2d 461, 463-64 (1999)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) People v. Tisdel
Ill. · 2002 · confidence medium
Ed. 2d 164, 172 , 104 S. Ct. 2305, 2311 (1984)), and only where the reasons for departure are “compelling” (People v. Robinson, 187 Ill. 2d 461, 463-64 (1999)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) People v. Tisdel
Ill. · 2002 · confidence medium
Ed. 2d 164, 172 , 104 S. Ct. 2305 , 23Í1 (1984)), and only where the reasons for departure are “compelling” (People v. Robinson, 187 Ill. 2d 461, 463-64 (1999)).
examined Cited "see" Commonwealth v. Hernandez (3×)
Mass. · 2019 · signal: see · confidence high
See People v. Robinson , 187 Ill. 2d 461 , 464, 241 Ill.Dec. 533 , 719 N.E.2d 662 (1999) (abatement ab initio has been Illinois law for over twenty years and "should be deemed controlling until and unless the General Assembly provides otherwise" [citation omitted] ); Bevel , 282 Va. at 479-480 , 717 S.E.2d 789 (if abatement is to be policy in Virginia, with good cause exception, "the adoption of such a policy and the designation of how and in what court such a determination should be made is more appropriately decided by the legislature, not the courts").
examined Cited "see" Strickland v. State (3×)
Ala. Crim. App. · 2004 · signal: see · confidence high
See People v. Robinson, 187 Ill.2d 461, 463 , 719 N.E.2d 662, 663 , 241 Ill.Dec. 533, 534 (1999) (‘the purpose of criminal prosecutions is to punish the defendant; continuing criminal proceedings when the defendant is dead is a useless act’); State v. Holland, 288 Mont. 164, 167 , 955 P.2d 1360, 1362 (1998) (adopting rationale for abating criminal proceeding upon defendant’s death set forth by the Arizona Supreme Court ‘that the interests of the state in protecting society have been satisfied, the imposition of punishment is impossible, and further collection of fines or forfeiture wou…
discussed Cited "see, e.g." State of Arizona v. Richard Allen Reed
Ariz. · 2020 · signal: see also · confidence medium
REED Opinion of the Court 110; see also People v. Robinson, 719 N.E.2d 662, 664 (Ill. 1999) (acknowledging that general assembly could abolish abatement ab initio doctrine); Bevel v. Commonwealth, 717 S.E.2d 789, 795 (Va. 2011) (leaving decision whether to adopt abatement ab initio doctrine and any exceptions to the legislature as a matter of policy). ¶19 In sum, the part of § 13-106(A) addressing post-conviction relief proceedings is valid because it is consistent with court procedures.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." People v. Petrenko (2×)
Ill. · 2010 · signal: see also · confidence medium
To hold that the dissent’s reasoning in Palmer now constitutes good cause for overruling that decision is directly at odds with the principle that “ ‘a question once deliberately examined and decided should be considered as settled and closed to further argument.’ ” Wakulich v. Mraz, 203 Ill. 2d 223, 230 (2003), quoting Prall v. Burckhartt, 299 Ill. 19, 41 (1921); see also People v. Lopez, 207 Ill. 2d 449, 459 (2003) (this court “ ‘will not depart from precedent “merely because the court is of the opinion that it might decide otherwise were the question a new one” ’ ”), q…
examined Cited "see, e.g." People v. Petrenko (3×)
Ill. · 2010 · signal: see also · confidence low
To hold that the dissent's reasoning in Palmer now constitutes good cause for overruling that decision is directly at odds with the principle that "`a question once deliberately examined and decided should be considered as settled and closed to further argument.'" Wakulich v. Mraz, 203 Ill.2d 223, 230 , 271 Ill.Dec. 649 , 785 N.E.2d 843 (2003), quoting Prall v. Burckhartt, 299 Ill. 19, 41 , 132 N.E. 280 (1921); see also People v. Lopez, 207 Ill.2d 449, 459 , 279 Ill.Dec. 628 , 800 N.E.2d 1211 (2003) (this court "`will not depart from precedent "merely because the court is of the opinion that i…
examined Cited "see, e.g." Wakulich v. Mraz (4×)
Ill. · 2003 · signal: see also · confidence medium
Although the doctrine of stare decisis does not constitute an “inexorable command” (Chicago Bar Ass’n v. Illinois State Board of Elections, 161 Ill. 2d 502, 510 (1994)), we will depart from the doctrine only upon a showing of “good cause” (Heimgaertner v. Benjamin Electric Manufacturing Co., 6 Ill. 2d 152, 166-67 (1955); see also People v. Robinson, 187 Ill. 2d 461, 463-64 (1999) (“compelling reasons may require a departure from prior precedent” (emphasis in original))).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Wakulich v. Mraz
Ill. · 2003 · signal: see also · confidence medium
Although the doctrine of stare decisis does not constitute an “inexorable command” ( Chicago Bar Ass’n v. Illinois State Board of Elections , 161 Ill. 2d 502, 510 (1994)), we will depart from the doctrine only upon a showing of “good cause” ( Heimgaertner v. Benjamin Electric Manufacturing Co. , 6 Ill. 2d 152, 166-67 (1955); see also People v. Robinson , 187 Ill. 2d 461, 463-64 (1999) (“compelling reasons may require a departure from prior precedent” (emphasis in original))).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
The PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Appellee,
v.
WILL ROBINSON Et Al., Appellants
86110.
Illinois Supreme Court.
Sep 23, 1999.
719 N.E.2d 662
Rita A. Fry, Public Defender, of Chicago (Lester Finkle, Emily Eisner and Evelyn G. Baniewicz, Assistant Public Defenders, of counsel), for appellants., James E. Ryan, Attorney General, of Springfield, and Richard A. Devine, State’s Attorney, of Chicago (William L. Browers, Assistant Attorney General, of Chicago, and Renee Goldfarb, Judy L. DeAngelis and Mary L. Boland, Assistant State’s Attorneys, of counsel), for the People.
Heiple.
Cited by 53 opinions  |  Published
3 passages pin-cited by 3 cases
Pinpoint authority: bottom 88%
Citer courts: Court of Appeals of Maryland (3) · Supreme Court of Alabama (2) · Court of Criminal Appeals of A… (2)
JUSTICE HEIPLE

delivered the opinion of the court:

In these consolidated appeals, defendants died while the direct appeals of their criminal convictions were pending before the appellate court. The appellate court dismissed the appeals but declined to void the defendants’ convictions (298 Ill. App. 3d 866) entered in the circuit court of Cook County. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and reaffirm the rule this court established in People v. Mazzone, 74 Ill. 2d 44 (1978), that when a defendant dies while his direct appeal is pending, the appeal must be dismissed and his conviction must be abated ab initio.

FACTS

Defendant John Dunn was convicted of voluntary manslaughter and sentenced to 24 years in prison. Defendant Amanda Wallace was convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to natural life in prison. Defendant Glennon Dye was convicted of aggravated criminal sexual assault and sentenced to 30 years in prison. Each defendant died while his or her direct appeal was pending in the appellate court: defendants Wallace and Dye committed suicide and defendant Dunn died of cancer.

Counsel representing defendants filed separate motions in the appellate court to dismiss defendants’ appeals and vacate their convictions. The appellate court consolidated the individual motions and dismissed defendants’ appeals, but refused to vacate their convictions. The appellate court held that the enactment of the Crime Victim’s Rights Amendment to the Illinois Constitution (Ill. Const. 1970, art. I, § 8.1 (eff. November 3, 1992)) required the court to consider the rights of the victims when deciding whether defendants’ convictions should be abated ab initio. The appellate court held that it would not abate defendants’ convictions because abatement would have a “senselessly harsh impact on the psychological well-being” of crime victims and their families by implying that defendants have somehow been exonerated.

This court granted the petition for leave to appeal filed by counsel representing defendants. 177 Ill. 2d R. 315(a).

ANALYSIS

In People v. Mazzone, 74 Ill. 2d 44 (1978), this court held that when a defendant dies while his direct appeal is pending before the appellate court, all of the criminal proceedings abate ab initio, from their inception. The rule adopted by this court in Mazzone recognizes that the purpose of criminal prosecutions is to punish the defendant; continuing criminal proceedings when the defendant is dead is a useless act. Mazzone, 74 Ill. 2d at 46. The State argues that Mazzone was wrongly decided and should be overruled based on the changes in the law contained in the Crime Victim’s Rights Amendment.

The Crime Victim’s Rights Amendment provides crime victims with a set of 10 distinct rights in criminal prosecutions. The State points specifically to two of these freshly minted constitutional rights of victims: the right to “be treated with fairness and respect for their dignity and privacy throughout the criminal justice process” (Ill. Const. 1970, art. I, § 8.1(a)(1)), and the right to restitution (Ill. Const. 1970, art. I, § 8.1(a)(10)). Unfortunately for the State’s argument, the Crime Victim’s Rights Amendment has neither application nor reference to the abatement of criminal prosecutions. That is to say, it is wholly irrelevant to the issue at hand. [1]

This court has acknowledged that compelling reasons may require a departure from prior precedent, but it has also recognized that it will not depart from precedent “merely because the court is of the opinion that it might decide otherwise were the question a new one.” Maki v. Frelk, 40 Ill. 2d 193, 196-97 (1968), citing Prall v. Burckhartt, 299 Ill. 19 (1921). The rule established in Mazzone that a defendant’s conviction abates ab initio if defendant dies while his direct appeal is pending has been the law in Illinois for over twenty years and “should be deemed controlling until and unless the General Assembly provides otherwise.” Kinsey Distilling Sales Co. v. Foremost Liquors Stores, Inc., 15 Ill. 2d 182, 188 (1958).

CONCLUSION

For the reasons stated above, the judgments of the appellate and circuit courts are vacated.

Judgments vacated.

1

The statute enacted by the General Assembly to enforce the Crime Victim’s Rights Amendment (725 ILCS 120/1 et seq. (West 1996)) is also irrelevant to the matter of abatement of criminal prosecutions.