11 Illinois opinions name it 1 courts 1977–2019 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. Peeplesgreen2 sentences2017An abuse of discretion occurs only when the trial court’s ruling is “arbitrary, fanciful, or unreasonable” or where “no reasonable [person] would take the view adopted by the trial court.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) People v. Illgen, 145 Ill. 2d 353, 364 (1991). “[T]he test for evaluating the court’s exercise of discretion is whether the means used to test impartiality have created a reasonable assurance that prejudice would be discovered if present.” People v. Peeples, 155 Ill. 2d 422, 459 (1993). ¶ 33 As an initial matter, we are not convinced that Mr. James properly requested the v 2017An abuse of discretion occurs only when the trial court’s ruling is “arbitrary, fanciful, or unreasonable” or where “no reasonable [person] would take the view adopted by the trial court.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) People v. Illgen, 145 Ill. 2d 353, 364 (1991). “[T]he test for evaluating the court’s exercise of discretion is whether the means used to test impartiality have created a reasonable assurance that prejudice would be discovered if present.” People v. Peeples, 155 Ill. 2d 422, 459 (1993). ¶ 33 As an initial matter, we are not convinced that Mr. James properly requested the v | 2 | 2 |
People v. Illgengreen2 sentences2017An abuse of discretion occurs only when the trial court’s ruling is “arbitrary, fanciful, or unreasonable” or where “no reasonable [person] would take the view adopted by the trial court.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) People v. Illgen, 145 Ill. 2d 353, 364 (1991). “[T]he test for evaluating the court’s exercise of discretion is whether the means used to test impartiality have created a reasonable assurance that prejudice would be discovered if present.” People v. Peeples, 155 Ill. 2d 422, 459 (1993). ¶ 33 As an initial matter, we are not convinced that Mr. James properly requested the v 2017An abuse of discretion occurs only when the trial court’s ruling is “arbitrary, fanciful, or unreasonable” or where “no reasonable [person] would take the view adopted by the trial court.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) People v. Illgen, 145 Ill. 2d 353, 364 (1991). “[T]he test for evaluating the court’s exercise of discretion is whether the means used to test impartiality have created a reasonable assurance that prejudice would be discovered if present.” People v. Peeples, 155 Ill. 2d 422, 459 (1993). ¶ 33 As an initial matter, we are not convinced that Mr. James properly requested the v | 2 | 2 |
State v. Rupegreen2 sentences2018App. 2014) (pivotal issue was whether the defendant shot the decedent or whether the decedent killed himself; after reversing convictions because of a voir dire error, court addressed issue likely to occur on remand and determined that the trial court erred in admitting evidence that the defendant owned eight firearms and ammunition that were not related to the shooting; evidence was minimally relevant and highly prejudicial; the fact that the defendant legally possessed guns and ammunition did not make the weapons relevant to the victim's death or help prove the charged offense); Commonwealth 2018App. 2014) (pivotal issue was whether the defendant shot the decedent or whether the decedent killed himself; after reversing convictions because of a voir dire error, court addressed issue likely to occur on remand and determined that the trial court erred in admitting evidence that the defendant owned eight firearms and ammunition that were not related to the shooting; evidence was minimally relevant and highly prejudicial; the fact that the defendant legally possessed guns and ammunition did not make the weapons relevant to the victim's death or help prove the charged offense); Commonwealth | 1 | 2 |
Commonwealth v. Valentingreen2 sentences2018App. 2014) (pivotal issue was whether the defendant shot the decedent or whether the decedent killed himself; after reversing convictions because of a voir dire error, court addressed issue likely to occur on remand and determined that the trial court erred in admitting evidence that the defendant owned eight firearms and ammunition that were not related to the shooting; evidence was minimally relevant and highly prejudicial; the fact that the defendant legally possessed guns and ammunition did not make the weapons relevant to the victim's death or help prove the charged offense); Commonwealth 2018App. 2014) (pivotal issue was whether the defendant shot the decedent or whether the decedent killed himself; after reversing convictions because of a voir dire error, court addressed issue likely to occur on remand and determined that the trial court erred in admitting evidence that the defendant owned eight firearms and ammunition that were not related to the shooting; evidence was minimally relevant and highly prejudicial; the fact that the defendant legally possessed guns and ammunition did not make the weapons relevant to the victim's death or help prove the charged offense); Commonwealth | 1 | 2 |
People v. Houstongreen2 sentences2010See also Houston, 226 Ill. 2d at 152 (court remanded for a reconstruction hearing where defendant had attempted to raise a voir dire claim in the trial court). 2010See also Houston, 226 Ill. 2d at 152 (court remanded for a reconstruction hearing where defendant had attempted to raise a voir dire claim in the trial court). | 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. Wilmington
green
2 sentences2019Wilmington, 2013 IL 112938, ¶ 31 . 2018Wilmington , 2013 IL 112938 , ¶ 31, 368 Ill.Dec. 211 , 983 N.E.2d 1015 . | 2 | 2018–2019 |
People v. Rogers
green
1 sentence2015Rick -8- 2015 IL App (2d) 130412 testified that he heard the woman’s voice and recognized it as defendant’s. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
People v. Garner
green
1 sentence2011People v. Thompson, 238 Ill. 2d 15 1-08-3459 598, 606, 808 N.E.2d 10 (2010) (compliance with a supreme court rule is reviewed de novo). | 1 | 2011–2011 |
People v. Thompson
green
2 sentences2011People v. Thompson, 238 Ill. 2d 598, 606 , 939 N.E.2d 403 (2010) (compliance with a supreme court rule is reviewed de novo). 2011People v. Thompson, 238 Ill. 2d 598, 606 , 939 N.E.2d 403 (2010) (compliance with a supreme court rule is reviewed de novo). | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Agran v. Checker Taxi Co.
green
2 sentences1977In Agran v. Checker Taxi Co. (1952), 412 Ill. 145 , 105 N.E.2d 713 , the court held invalid a statutory provision which prohibited ex parte action to dismiss a case for want of prosecution until every attorney of record had been given 5 days notice. 1977In Agran v. Checker Taxi Co. (1952), 412 Ill. 145 , 105 N.E.2d 713 , the court held invalid a statutory provision which prohibited ex parte action to dismiss a case for want of prosecution until every attorney of record had been given 5 days notice. | 1 | 1977–1977 |
The People v. Lobb
green
2 sentences1977In People v. Lobb (1959), 17 Ill. 2d 287 , 161 N.E.2d 325 , the original voir dire rule permitting the court to originate the questioning had been upheld. 1977In People v. Lobb (1959), 17 Ill. 2d 287 , 161 N.E.2d 325 , the original voir dire rule permitting the court to originate the questioning had been upheld. | 1 | 1977–1977 |
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.