11 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 1984–2015 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. Glaspergreen2 sentences2015People v. Glasper, 234 Ill. 2d 173, 204 (2009). 2015People v. Glasper, 234 Ill. 2d 173, 204 (2009). | 3 | 3 |
People v. Houstongreen2 sentences2008See Houston, 226 Ill. 2d at 152 , 874 N.E.2d at 34 . 2008See Houston, 226 Ill. 2d at 152 , 874 N.E.2d at 34 . | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Eubanks
green
2 sentences2010People v. Eubanks, 279 Ill. 2010People v. Eubanks, 279 Ill. | 2 | 2010–2010 |
Torrez v. Raag
green
2 sentences2008App. 3d 779 , 357 N.E.2d 632 (1976) (no abuse of discretion found in trial court granting new trial because trial court is in a better position to determine the prejudicial effect of defense counsel’s remarks on the jury). 2008App. 3d 779 , 357 N.E.2d 632 (1976) (no abuse of discretion found in trial court granting new trial because trial court is in a better position to determine the prejudicial effect of defense counsel's remarks on the jury). | 2 | 2008–2008 |
United States v. Phillip Allen Field
green
1 sentence1991Whether the probative value of the evidence is outweighed by its prejudicial effect is a matter left to the sound discretion of the trial court (People v. Stewart (1984), 105 Ill. 2d 22, 62-63 ; United States v. Field (7th Cir. 1989), 875 F.2d 130 ), and we will not reverse the court’s determination absent a clear abusé of that discretion. | 1 | 1991–1991 |
People v. Stewart
green
1 sentence1991Whether the probative value of the evidence is outweighed by its prejudicial effect is a matter left to the sound discretion of the trial court (People v. Stewart (1984), 105 Ill. 2d 22, 62-63 ; United States v. Field (7th Cir. 1989), 875 F.2d 130 ), and we will not reverse the court’s determination absent a clear abusé of that discretion. | 1 | 1991–1991 |
People v. Yates
green
2 sentences1984(See People v. Yates (1983), 98 Ill.2d 502, 538 .) Moreover, the objection which Holman did raise to the statement concerning the Supreme Court's disapproval of our 1972 death penalty statute failed to elicit such an admonition or occasion the striking of the offending remarks. 1984(See People v. Yates (1983), 98 Ill. 2d 502, 538 .) Moreover, the objection which Holman did raise to the statement concerning the Supreme Court’s disapproval of our 1972 death penalty statute failed to elicit such an admonition or occasion the striking of the offending remarks. | 1 | 1984–1984 |
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.