How cited: People v. Carlock · Go Syfert

People v. Carlock (1981)

green · 63 citation events across 2 courts. Showing the 10 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
All Green 10
Treatment trajectory · 1983 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
198320042026
Sort: By significance · Most recent
green People v. Risch-Defina (1996)
Rule Authority · Ill. App. Ct. · 2 citations in this opinion
In People v. Carlock, 102 Ill.
green People v. Toliver (2016)
Rule Authority · Ill. App. Ct.
“If a statute increasing a penalty or punishment is capable of two constructions, the one which operates in favor of the accused is to be adopted; such a statute is highly penal and should not be extended in its application to cases which do not, by the strictest construction, fall within its terms.” People v. Carlock, 102 Ill.
green People v. Toliver (2016)
Rule Authority · Ill. App. Ct.
“If a statute increasing a penalty or punishment is capable of two constructions, the one which operates in favor of the accused is to be adopted; such a statute is highly penal and should not be extended in its application to cases which do not, by the strictest construction, fall within its terms.” People v. Carlock, 102 Ill.
green People v. Toliver (2016)
Rule Authority · Ill. App. Ct.
“If a statute increasing a penalty or punishment is capable of two constructions, the one which operates in favor of the accused is to be adopted; such a statute is highly penal and should not be extended in its application to cases which do not, by the strictest construction, fall within its terms.” People v. Carlock, 102 Ill.
green People v. Toliver (2016)
Rule Authority · Ill. App. Ct.
“If a statute increasing a penalty or punishment is capable of two constructions, the one which operates in favor of the accused is to be adopted; such a statute is highly penal and should not be extended in its application to cases which do not, by the strictest construction, fall within its terms.” People v. Carlock, 102 Ill.
green People v. Sheehan (1995)
Rule Authority · Ill.
App. 3d 689, 695 ("it cannot legally be known that an offense has been committed until there has been a conviction”); People v. Carlock (1981), 102 Ill.
green People v. Tritthardt (1990)
Rule Authority · Ill. App. Ct.
(Cf. People v. Carlock (1981), 102 Ill.
green People v. Alejos (1983)
Rule Authority · Ill. · signal: cf.
In Harón we noted that where, as here, “we have no legislative history to assist us in determining whether the General Assembly intended the *** enhancement to apply to such charges,” this court “has recognized that a policy of lenity applies with respect to the interpretation of criminal statutes [citations],. and also recognizes the rule of construction giving precedence to a specific provision where it conflicts with a general one. [Citation.]” (People v. Haron (1981), 85…
green People v. Turyna (2021)
Cited (see also) · Ill. App. Ct. · signal: see also
People v. Whitney, 188 Ill. 2d 91, 98-99 (1999); see also People v. Carlock, 102 Ill.
noting that an enhanced statutory penalty is “highly penal and should not be extended in its application to cases which do not, by the strictest construction fall, within its terms”
green People v. Leckner (1986)
Cited (see also) · Ill. App. Ct. · signal: see also
Stat. 1939, ch. 38, par. 325)); see also People v. Carlock (1981), 102 Ill.