Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
19 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 2000–2024 4 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 |
|---|---|---|
People v. Pattersongreen2 sentences2022See People v. Holman, 191 Ill. 2d 204, 210 (2000); People v. Patterson, 192 Ill. 2d 93, 139 (2000) (“We have recognized [] that, in the interests of fundamental fairness, the doctrine of res judicata can be relaxed if the defendant presents substantial new evidence.”). 2020But Patterson explained that, “in the interests of fundamental fairness, the doctrine of res judicata can be relaxed if the defendant presents substantial new evidence.” (Emphasis added). 192 Ill. 2d at 139 . | 12 | 17 |
People v. Evansgreen2 sentences2000See Hobley, 182 Ill. 2d at 449 ; People v. Madej, 177 Ill. 2d 116, 132 (1997); see also People v. Evans, 186 Ill. 2d 83, 91 (1999). 2000See Hobley, 182 Ill.2d at 449 , 231 Ill.Dec. 321 , 696 N.E.2d 313 ; People v. Madej, 177 Ill.2d 116, 132 , 226 Ill.Dec. 453 , 685 N.E.2d 908 (1997); see also People v. Evans, 186 Ill.2d 83, 91 , 237 Ill.Dec. 118 , 708 N.E.2d 1158 (1999). | 2 | 2 |
People v. Madejgreen2 sentences2000See Hobley, 182 Ill. 2d at 449 ; People v. Madej, 177 Ill. 2d 116, 132 (1997); see also People v. Evans, 186 Ill. 2d 83, 91 (1999). 2000See Hobley, 182 Ill.2d at 449 , 231 Ill.Dec. 321 , 696 N.E.2d 313 ; People v. Madej, 177 Ill.2d 116, 132 , 226 Ill.Dec. 453 , 685 N.E.2d 908 (1997); see also People v. Evans, 186 Ill.2d 83, 91 , 237 Ill.Dec. 118 , 708 N.E.2d 1158 (1999). | 2 | 2 |
People v. Hobleygreen2 sentences2000See Hobley, 182 Ill. 2d at 449 ; People v. Madej, 177 Ill. 2d 116, 132 (1997); see also People v. Evans, 186 Ill. 2d 83, 91 (1999). 2000See Hobley, 182 Ill.2d at 449 , 231 Ill.Dec. 321 , 696 N.E.2d 313 ; People v. Madej, 177 Ill.2d 116, 132 , 226 Ill.Dec. 453 , 685 N.E.2d 908 (1997); see also People v. Evans, 186 Ill.2d 83, 91 , 237 Ill.Dec. 118 , 708 N.E.2d 1158 (1999). | 2 | 2 |
People v. Holmangreen1 sentence2022See People v. Holman, 191 Ill. 2d 204, 210 (2000); People v. Patterson, 192 Ill. 2d 93, 139 (2000) (“We have recognized [] that, in the interests of fundamental fairness, the doctrine of res judicata can be relaxed if the defendant presents substantial new evidence.”). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Reyes
green
2 sentences2018But “our supreme court has recognized that, ‘in the interests of fundamental fairness, the doctrine of res judicata can be relaxed if the defendant presents substantial new evidence.’ ” Id. (quoting People v. Patterson, 192 Ill. 2d 93, 139 (2000)). ¶ 75 For new evidence to be sufficient to overcome the bar of res judicata and warrant a new trial, the evidence (1) must have been discovered since trial and be of such character that the petitioner could not have discovered it sooner through due diligence, (2) must be material and not merely cumulative of existing trial evidence, and (3) must be “ 2017But "our supreme court has recognized that, 'in the interests of fundamental fairness, the doctrine of res judicata can be relaxed if the defendant presents substantial new evidence.' " Id. (quoting People v. Patterson , 192 Ill. 2d 93 , 139, 249 Ill.Dec. 12 , 735 N.E.2d 616 (2000) ). ¶ 75 For new evidence to be sufficient to overcome the bar of res judicata and warrant a new trial, the evidence (1) must have been discovered since trial and be of such character that the petitioner could not have discovered it sooner through due diligence, (2) must be material and not merely cumulative of exist | 3 | 2013–2018 |
People v. Barnslater
green
2 sentences2017“The standards addressing when new evidence is sufficiently substantial so as to relax res judicata are the same standards used to determine whether newly discovered evidence should result in a new trial.” Barnslater, 373 Ill. 2015"The standards addressing when new evidence is sufficiently substantial so as to relax res judicata are the same standards used to determine whether newly discovered evidence should result in a new trial." Barnslater, 373 Ill. | 2 | 2015–2017 |
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.