11 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 1972–2020 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. Bellgreen2 sentences2015See People v. Bell, 196 Ill. 2d 343, 355 (2001) (where the defendant was convicted of armed robbery and aggravated battery, and the trial court imposed an extended-term sentence for the battery (the less serious offense) alone, the extended term was void because the offenses were part of a single course of conduct). ¶ 21 Under the Jordan/Coleman rule, the extended-term sentence on the less serious offense, AUUF, was lawful only if the two offenses were part of unrelated courses of conduct. 2014See People v. Bell, 196 Ill. 2d 343, 355 (2001) (where the defendant was convicted of armed robbery and aggravated battery, and the trial court imposed an extended-term sentence for the battery (the less serious offense) alone, the extended term was void because the offenses were part of a single course of conduct). ¶ 21 Under the Jordan/Coleman rule, the extended-term sentence on the less serious offense, AUUF, was lawful only if the two offenses were part of unrelated courses of conduct. | 2 | 2 |
People v. Pitmangreen1 sentence2014People v. Pitman, 211 Ill. 2d 502, 512 (2004). | 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. Jefferson
green
2 sentences2005Jefferson, 184 Ill. 2d at 497-98 . 2005Jefferson , 184 Ill. 2d at 497-98 . | 2 | 2005–2005 |
Chicago Transit Authority v. Department of Human Rights
green
2 sentences2005App. 3d at 755 , 523 N.E.2d at 1112 ) is still controlling, but, regardless of whether the CTA or Coleman standard is employed, the default was unwarranted. 2005App. 3d at 755 , 523 N.E.2d at 1112 ) is still controlling, but, regardless of whether the CTA or Coleman standard is employed, the default was unwarranted. | 2 | 2005–2005 |
People v. Harris
green
1 sentence2020Id. at 295-96 . | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Ogg v. City of Springfield
green
2 sentences1992This defense of Coleman had been waived when he filed a claim for contribution against Henrici; it remained waived even after Coleman’s claim was later dismissed. ( 121 Ill. 1992This defense of Coleman had been waived when he filed a claim for contribution against Henrici; it remained waived even after Coleman's claim was later dismissed. ( 121 Ill.App.3d at 33-34 , 76 Ill.Dec. 531 , 458 N.E.2d 1331 .) However, in Ogg , the counterclaim was raised within the pending suit and not as a new cause of action. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Walder v. United States
green
2 sentences1989The conviction for armed robbery of Terrell Jackson cannot stand due to insufficiency of evidence.” 1 The complete text of defendant Maurice Coleman’s “Motion to Suppress Identification Testimony” is set forth as Appendix I. 2 The complete text of defendant Joseph Barnes’ “Motion to Suppress Identification Testimony” is set forth as Appendix II. 3 The complete text of defendant Coleman’s motion for a new trial is set forth in Appendix III. 4 The complete text of defendant Barnes’ motion for a new trial is set forth as Appendix IV. 5 Walden v. United States (1954), 347 U.S. 62 , 98 L. 1989The conviction for armed robbery of Terrell Jackson cannot stand due to insufficiency of evidence.” 1 The complete text of defendant Maurice Coleman’s “Motion to Suppress Identification Testimony” is set forth as Appendix I. 2 The complete text of defendant Joseph Barnes’ “Motion to Suppress Identification Testimony” is set forth as Appendix II. 3 The complete text of defendant Coleman’s motion for a new trial is set forth in Appendix III. 4 The complete text of defendant Barnes’ motion for a new trial is set forth as Appendix IV. 5 Walden v. United States (1954), 347 U.S. 62 , 98 L. | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Harris v. New York
green
2 sentences1989Ed. 503 , 74 S. Ct. 354 ; Harris v. New York (1971), 401 U.S. 222 , 28 L. 1989Ed. 503 , 74 S. Ct. 354 ; Harris v. New York (1971), 401 U.S. 222 , 28 L. | 1 | 1989–1989 |
The PEOPLE v. Adams
green
2 sentences1972In People v. Adams (1970), 46 Ill.2d 200, 206 , the Illinois Supreme Court, noting that the preliminary hearing in Illinois, is essentially like that in Alabama, and therefore also a “critical stage” requiring counsel under the Coleman rule, held that the application of the rule of Coleman would be prospective only. 1972In People v. Adams (1970), 46 Ill.2d 200, 206 , the Illinois Supreme Court, noting that the preliminary hearing in Illinois, is essentially like that in Alabama, and therefore also a “critical stage” requiring counsel under the Coleman rule, held that the application of the rule of Coleman would be prospective only. | 1 | 1972–1972 |
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.