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.
17 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 1992–2017 0 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. Bakergreen2 sentences2017People v. Baker, 341 Ill. 2017People v. Baker, 341 Ill. | 2 | 4 |
People v. Walkergreen2 sentences1999People v. Walker, 109 Ill. 2d 484, 504 (1985). 1999People v. Walker, 109 Ill. 2d 484, 504 (1985). | 2 | 3 |
People v. Szabogreen2 sentences1999Plain error is a “narrow and limited exception to the general waiver rule” (People v. Szabo, 113 Ill. 2d 83, 94 (1986)) and should only be invoked where (1) the evidence is closely balanced or (2) the alleged error is so substantial that it deprived the defendant of a fair hearing. 1999Plain error is a "narrow and limited exception to the general waiver rule ***," ( People v. Szabo, 113 Ill. 2d 83, 94 (1986)) and should only be invoked where (1) the evidence is closely balanced or (2) the alleged error is so substantial that it deprived the defendant of a fair hearing. | 2 | 3 |
People v. Bealsgreen2 sentences1996People v. Beals, 162 Ill. 2d 497, 511 , 643 N.E.2d 789, 796 (1994). 1996People v. Beals, 162 Ill. 2d 497, 511 , 643 N.E.2d 789, 796 (1994). | 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. Marlow
green
2 sentences2004Marlow , 303 Ill. 2004Marlow, 303 Ill. | 4 | 2002–2004 |
People v. Clark
green
2 sentences2017As the plain language of Rule 615(a) indicates, “remedial application of the plain error doctrine is discretionary.” People v. Clark, 2016 IL 118845 , ¶ 42, 50 N.E.3d 1120 . ¶ 17 The plain-error doctrine may be invoked where the evidence is closely balanced or where the error deprived the defendant of a fair hearing. 2017As the plain language of Rule 615(a) indicates, “remedial application of the plain error doctrine is discretionary.” People v. Clark, 2016 IL 118845 , ¶ 42, 50 N.E.3d 1120 . ¶ 17 The plain-error doctrine may be invoked where the evidence is closely balanced or where the error deprived the defendant of a fair hearing. | 2 | 2017–2017 |
People v. MacRi
green
2 sentences2006Macri, 185 Ill. 2d at 72 . 2006Macri, 185 Ill. 2d at 72 . | 2 | 2006–2006 |
People v. Lyons
neutral
2 sentences2005App. 3d 647 , 291 N.E.2d 25 (1972), the reviewing court determined that the judge’s statements concerning trial counsel, made prior to the commencement of a postconviction evidentiary hearing, were wholly insufficient to show a preconceived opinion of trial counsel’s credibility or a bias in his favor so as to deprive the defendant of a fair hearing. 2005In People v. Lyons , 8 Ill. App. 3d 647 , 291 N.E.2d 25 (1972), the reviewing court determined that the judge's statements concerning trial counsel, made prior to the commencement of a postconviction evidentiary hearing, were wholly insufficient to show a preconceived opinion of trial counsel's credibility or a bias in his favor so as to deprive the defendant of a fair hearing. | 2 | 2005–2005 |
People v. Hampton
green
1 sentence1993(People v. Hampton (1992), 149 Ill. 2d 71, 100 .) Otherwise, defense counsel could secure a reversal simply by intentionally failing to object and, by design, depriving the trial court of the opportunity to prevent or correct the error. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
People v. Enoch
green
1 sentence1993(Enoch, 122 Ill. 2d at 190 .) Plain error, however, is a narrow and limited exception to the general waiver rule and is to be invoked only where the evidence is closely balanced or the alleged error is so substantial that it deprived the defendant of a fair hearing. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
People v. Pastorino
green
1 sentence1992Plain error is a “ ‘narrow and limited exception to the general waiver rule.’ ” (Szabo, 113 Ill. 2d at 94 , quoting People v. Pastorino (1982), 91 Ill. 2d 178, 188 .) The exception is to be invoked only where the evidence is closely balanced or the alleged error is so substantial that it deprived the defendant of a fair hearing. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
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.