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 1 courts 1979–2026 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. Kiddgreen2 sentences2012People v. Slater, 228 Ill.2d 137, 149 , 319 Ill.Dec. 862 , 886 N.E.2d 986 (2008). ¶ 41 The issue of standing is governed by the following principles: "A fourth amendment violation can be urged successfully only by those whose rights have actually been violated by the search itself, not by those who have been aggrieved solely by the introduction of damaging evidence. [Citation.] Capacity to claim fourth amendment protection depends, not upon a property right, but upon whether the aggrieved person has a legitimate expectation of privacy in the place invaded. [Citations.] A subjective expectation 2012People v. Slater, 228 Ill.2d 137, 149 , 319 Ill.Dec. 862 , 886 N.E.2d 986 (2008). ¶ 41 The issue of standing is governed by the following principles: "A fourth amendment violation can be urged successfully only by those whose rights have actually been violated by the search itself, not by those who have been aggrieved solely by the introduction of damaging evidence. [Citation.] Capacity to claim fourth amendment protection depends, not upon a property right, but upon whether the aggrieved person has a legitimate expectation of privacy in the place invaded. [Citations.] A subjective expectation | 1 | 2 |
People v. Slatergreen2 sentences2012People v. Slater, 228 Ill.2d 137, 149 , 319 Ill.Dec. 862 , 886 N.E.2d 986 (2008). ¶ 41 The issue of standing is governed by the following principles: "A fourth amendment violation can be urged successfully only by those whose rights have actually been violated by the search itself, not by those who have been aggrieved solely by the introduction of damaging evidence. [Citation.] Capacity to claim fourth amendment protection depends, not upon a property right, but upon whether the aggrieved person has a legitimate expectation of privacy in the place invaded. [Citations.] A subjective expectation 2012People v. Slater, 228 Ill.2d 137, 149 , 319 Ill.Dec. 862 , 886 N.E.2d 986 (2008). ¶ 41 The issue of standing is governed by the following principles: "A fourth amendment violation can be urged successfully only by those whose rights have actually been violated by the search itself, not by those who have been aggrieved solely by the introduction of damaging evidence. [Citation.] Capacity to claim fourth amendment protection depends, not upon a property right, but upon whether the aggrieved person has a legitimate expectation of privacy in the place invaded. [Citations.] A subjective expectation | 1 | 2 |
People v. Mendezgreen1 sentence2026See People v. Mendez, 322 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Hylandgreen1 sentence2023As far as we know, from the briefs and from our own research, the constitutionality of investigative alerts was first called into question in 2012, some nine years after petitioner was arrested, in the special concurrence filed in People v. Hyland, 2012 IL App (1st) 110966, ¶¶ 38-52 (Salone, J., specially concurring, joined by Neville, J.). ¶7 Hyland was decided on the workaday issue of probable cause: the defendant was arrested -2- No. 1-20-0936 pursuant to an investigative alert, but the evidence at the suppression hearing failed to establish that the alert itself was based on facts that gav | 1 | 1 |
People v. Colemangreen1 sentence2022See People v. Coleman, 203 Ill. | 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. Cregan
green
1 sentence2022The Act provides that a prisoner may institute a proceeding under the Act if he or she alleges “in the proceedings which resulted in his or her conviction there was a substantial denial of his or her rights under the Constitution of the United States or of the State of Illinois or both.” Id. § 122-1(a)(1). ¶ 16 As discussed, the evidence at the suppression hearing was that Meeker and others at the Savanna police department heard a loud explosion from south of the police department “[t]owards the Bowen Street Area,” which Meeker described as a high-crime area. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
People v. Hayes
green
1 sentence2020In light of these facts, ASA McCarthy’s mere review of the complaint before it was filed did not constitute significant “prosecutor[ial] involvement in the procurement of the warrant” and “did not signal a commitment by the State to prosecute the defendant.” Hayes, 139 Ill. 2d at 125-26 . ¶ 75 Defendant also cites the prosecutors’ actions in submitting subpoenas to the grand jury, assisting Sperando in securing a court order to exhume Noreen’s body, interviewing witnesses, visiting the scene of Noreen’s death, directing Sperando to request certain evidence from a state agency, securing a secon | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Herring v. United States
green
2 sentences2009Herring, 555 U.S. at 147 , 172 L. 2009Herring, 555 U.S. at 147 , 172 L. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
People v. Mahaffey
green
1 sentence1995The psychologist opined Mahaffey had a very low intelligence and a "borderline personality disorder.” He further opined that it was "highly probable that [defendant] could not understand his Miranda rights.” (Mahaffey, 165 Ill. 2d at 462 .) The supreme court concluded that the introduction of this evidence at the suppression hearing would not have created a reasonable probability that defendant’s motion to suppress would have been granted. | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Gross v. Illinois
green
1 sentence1989Ed. 2d 115 , 109 S. Ct. 142 .) Defendant argues that the evidence at the suppression hearing was sufficient to satisfy defendant’s burden of proof regarding standing to contest the search. | 1 | 1989–1989 |
People v. Gonzales
green
1 sentence1984(See, e.g., People v. Gonzales (1974), 22 Ill. | 1 | 1984–1984 |
The PEOPLE v. Howlett
green
1 sentence1979App. 3d 906 , 274 N.E.2d 885 .) Based on the evidence at the suppression hearing, we cannot say that the trial court erred in determining that defendant was not arrested until after he made his oral confession. | 1 | 1979–1979 |
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.