23 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 1935–2026 9 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Illinois courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
XLP CORP. v. County of Lakegreen2 sentences2007See XLP Corp. v. County of Lake, 359 Ill. 2007See XLP Corp. v. County of Lake, 359 Ill.App.3d 239, 246 , 295 Ill.Dec. 329 , 832 N.E.2d 480 (2005). | 2 | 2 |
People v. Perezgreen2 sentences1998See Perez, 148 Ill.2d at 192-94 , 170 Ill.Dec. 304 , 592 N.E.2d 984 (defendant satisfied performance prong by showing counsel's failure to investigate and present mitigating evidence of defendant's background was not the product of a thorough investigation and thus not a strategic decision). 1998See Perez, 148 Ill.2d at 192-94 , 170 Ill.Dec. 304 , 592 N.E.2d 984 (defendant satisfied performance prong by showing counsel's failure to investigate and present mitigating evidence of defendant's background was not the product of a thorough investigation and thus not a strategic decision). | 2 | 2 |
Bryan Range v. Attorney General United Statesgreen1 sentence2024Upon a thorough review of the historical restrictions for possession of firearms, the Brooks court concluded that “such categorical restrictions [were] inextricably linked to the notion of ‘law abiding citizens.’ ” Id. ¶ 92. ¶ 22 The court noted that “[r]estrictions on the possession of firearms date back to England in the 1600’s when the government repeatedly disarmed individuals whose conduct reflected that they could not be trusted to abide by ‘the sovereign and [his] dictates.’ ” Id. ¶ 93, quoting Range v. Attorney General 69 F.4th 96, 120 (3d Cir. 2023) (Krause, J., dissenting). | 1 | 1 |
Wiggen v. Wiggengreen1 sentence2013See Wiggen v. Wiggen, 2011 IL App (2d) 100982, ¶ 20 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
People v. Kelleygreen1 sentence2025See id. at 89 (reasoning that the first step under Bruen “does not contemplate the actor or the subject” and so “the defendant’s status as a felon is irrelevant at this stage of the analysis.”); but see, e.g., People v. Kelley, 2024 IL App (1st) 230569, ¶ 22 (rejecting the defendant’s facial challenge to the armed habitual criminal statute, stating that “Bruen is clear that second amendment rights apply to law-abiding citizens for self- defense”). ¶ 18 Even if we presumed that a felon’s firearm possession is covered under the “plain text” of the Second Amendment, however, defendant’s challenge | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen
green
2 sentences2026Thus, the defendant’s status as a felon is irrelevant at this stage of the analysis as the defendant’s possession of a firearm is “presumptively constitutional.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Id. (citing Bruen, 597 U.S. at 17-19 ). 2026Thus, the defendant’s status as a felon is irrelevant at this stage of the analysis as the defendant’s possession of a firearm is “presumptively constitutional.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Id. (citing Bruen, 597 U.S. at 17-19 ). | 5 | 2023–2026 |
Kev, Inc. v. Kitsap County and the Honorable Ray Aardal and John Horsley, County Commissioners of Kitsap, Etc.
green
2 sentences2005Kev, Inc., 793 F.2d at 1058-59 . 2005Kev, Inc. , 793 F.2d at 1058-59 . | 2 | 2005–2005 |
People v. Morrison
neutral
2 sentences2003The Roy court relied on a single case in support of this stage of its analysis, People v. Morrison, 223 Ill. 2003The Roy court relied on a single case in support of this stage of its analysis, People v. Morrison, 223 Ill. | 2 | 2003–2003 |
People v. Velasco
green
1 sentence2026And in determining whether the evidence is sufficiently conclusive that it would probably change the outcome at a retrial, “the court at the third stage must necessarily consider whether the new evidence would ultimately be admissible at a retrial.” Id. ¶ 55 A brief recap of the trial evidence will help set the stage for our analysis. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
People v. Brooks
green
1 sentence2024Instead, the defendant’s possession of a firearm is ‘presumptively constitutional.’ [Citation.]” Id. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Village of Bellwood Board of Fire & Police Commissioners v. Human Rights Commission
green
1 sentence2023Id. at 350 . ¶ 53 We agree that Village of Bellwood supports the existence of a public policy against racial discrimination and harassment in the workplace, but the existence of the policy has already - 17 - been discussed and is not the relevant issue at this stage of the analysis. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Nosbaum Ex Rel. Harding v. Martini
green
2 sentences2000App. 3d 108 , 726 N.E.2d 84 (2000), this court reversed the circuit court’s order dismissing the complaint and urged that there be an evidentiary hearing on remand, despite the fact that no evidentiary hearing was requested, holding: “ ‘In determining [a section 2 — 619] motion on the merits *** the trial court may not simply resolve the motion on the bases of the affidavits and similar material submitted in the initial stage of the hearing on the motion. 2000Rather[,] an evidentiary hearing must be held, and the unresolved issue or issues of fact must be determined on the basis of a preponderance of the evidence.’ ” 312 Ill. | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Kokinis v. Kotrich
green
1 sentence1993Because the order arose from a motion for a directed finding (see Kokinis v. Kotrich (1980), 81 Ill. 2d 151, 154-55 ), we must remand the cause for a continued hearing. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
People v. Kellogg
green
1 sentence1985It not only hears the juror’s response, it also observes the juror’s demeanor and tone of voice. ( 77 Ill. 2d 524, 529 .) We can only second-guess at this stage on those factors considered by the trial court. | 1 | 1985–1985 |
Powell v. Jones
green
2 sentences1985“A certified employee has the right to petition the Director, within 15 days of receipt of layoff notice, for a reconsideration (Rule 2 — 596), and a right to request a hearing before the Civil Service Commission, which may consist of a staff investigation, or informal hearing, or formal hearing, on the validity of the layoff.” ( 56 Ill. 2d 70, 79 , 305 N.E.2d 166,170 .) The court in Powell equated the staff investigation with a stage in the hearing process. 1985“A certified employee has the right to petition the Director, within 15 days of receipt of layoff notice, for a reconsideration (Rule 2 — 596), and a right to request a hearing before the Civil Service Commission, which may consist of a staff investigation, or informal hearing, or formal hearing, on the validity of the layoff.” ( 56 Ill. 2d 70, 79 , 305 N.E.2d 166,170 .) The court in Powell equated the staff investigation with a stage in the hearing process. | 1 | 1985–1985 |
Merritt v. Hummer
green
2 sentences1935So far as O’Day v. Meyers, supra, may be understood to the contrary, it must be deemed modified by this decision.” In the case of Merritt v. Hummer, 21 Colo. App. 568 , 122 Pac. 816 , the court say: “Plaintiff’s counsel called the defendant as a witness and examined him as upon cross-examination, under section 7284, R. 1935So far as O’Day v. Meyers, supra, may be understood to the contrary, it must be deemed modified by this decision.” In the case of Merritt v. Hummer, 21 Colo. App. 568 , 122 Pac. 816 , the court say: “Plaintiff’s counsel called the defendant as a witness and examined him as upon cross-examination, under section 7284, R. | 1 | 1935–1935 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.