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.
12 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 2017–2025 5 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. Heidergreen2 sentences2025See Heider, 231 Ill. 2d at 18 (finding issue was preserved where - 10 - trial court had the opportunity to review the substance of the claimed sentencing error). 2024People v. Heider, 231 Ill. 2d 1, 18 (2008). | 2 | 2 |
People v. Thompsongreen1 sentence2017See also People v. Thompson, 2015 IL 118151, ¶ 33 (stating that after Castleberry, it is “no longer valid” to argue that a sentence that does not conform to a statutory requirement is void). ¶ 18 As directed by this court, both parties filed supplemental briefs addressing whether Castleberry applies to matters on collateral review. | 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. Price
green
2 sentences2025However, Castleberry eliminated the ability of appellate courts to sua sponte correct statutorily nonconforming sentences and eliminated a defendant’s ability to “rely on the void sentence rule to overcome forfeiture of a claimed sentencing error or challenge a statutorily nonconforming sentence in perpetuity.” People v. Price, 2016 IL 118613 , ¶ 17. 2022“After Castleberry, a reviewing court may no longer, sua sponte, correct a statutorily nonconforming sentence [citation], the State may no longer seek to correct such a sentence on direct review but must seek a writ of mandamus to do so [citation], and a defendant may no longer rely on the void sentence rule to overcome forfeiture of a claimed sentencing error or to challenge a statutorily nonconforming sentence in perpetuity [citation].” Id. | 9 | 2017–2025 |
People v. Smith
green
1 sentence2020Moreover, while the Act permits the filing of a successive petition, “[a] defendant must establish cause and prejudice as to each individual claim asserted in a successive postconviction petition to escape dismissal under the doctrine of res judicata and waiver. [Citations.]” People v. Smith, 2016 IL App (1st) 140887 , appeal denied, judgment vacated, abrogated by Price, 2016 IL 118613 . | 1 | 2020–2020 |
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.