10 Illinois opinions name it 1 courts 2001–2015 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. Hansongreen2 sentences2015After that point, she claimed to be unable to remember what defendant did to her. - 53 - ¶ 114 We acknowledge that forfeiture by wrongdoing has typically been used in murder cases (see, e.g., People v. Hanson, 238 Ill. 2d 74, 97 , 939 N.E.2d 238, 252 (2010); People v. Coleman, 2014 IL App (5th) 110274 , 24 N.E.3d 373 ; People v. Peterson, 2012 IL App (3d) 100514-B , 968 N.E.2d 204 ), but we see no reason why that doctrine should not apply in any case in which a defendant has succeeded in undermining the criminal justice system by preventing the trier of fact from hearing all pertinent testimon 2015After that point, she claimed to be unable to remember what defendant did to her. - 53 - ¶ 114 We acknowledge that forfeiture by wrongdoing has typically been used in murder cases (see, e.g., People v. Hanson, 238 Ill. 2d 74, 97 , 939 N.E.2d 238, 252 (2010); People v. Coleman, 2014 IL App (5th) 110274 , 24 N.E.3d 373 ; People v. Peterson, 2012 IL App (3d) 100514-B , 968 N.E.2d 204 ), but we see no reason why that doctrine should not apply in any case in which a defendant has succeeded in undermining the criminal justice system by preventing the trier of fact from hearing all pertinent testimon | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Anderson v. Department of Public Property
green
2 sentences2007App. 3d 772, 778 , 489 N.E.2d 12 (1986), for the general proposition that when the burdened party presents an unanswered prima facie case, the trier of fact must rule for the burdened party as a matter of law. 2007App. 3d 772, 778 , 489 N.E.2d 12 (1986), for the general proposition that when the burdened party presents an unanswered prima facie case, the trier of fact must rule for the burdened party as a matter of law. | 7 | 2001–2013 |
Pochopien v. Regional Board of School Trustees of the Lake County Educational Service Region
green
2 sentences2014Pochopien, 322 Ill. 2014Pochopien, 322 Ill. | 2 | 2014–2014 |
People v. Peterson
neutral
1 sentence2015After that point, she claimed to be unable to remember what defendant did to her. - 53 - ¶ 114 We acknowledge that forfeiture by wrongdoing has typically been used in murder cases (see, e.g., People v. Hanson, 238 Ill. 2d 74, 97 , 939 N.E.2d 238, 252 (2010); People v. Coleman, 2014 IL App (5th) 110274 , 24 N.E.3d 373 ; People v. Peterson, 2012 IL App (3d) 100514-B , 968 N.E.2d 204 ), but we see no reason why that doctrine should not apply in any case in which a defendant has succeeded in undermining the criminal justice system by preventing the trier of fact from hearing all pertinent testimon | 1 | 2015–2015 |
People v. Coleman
green
1 sentence2015After that point, she claimed to be unable to remember what defendant did to her. - 53 - ¶ 114 We acknowledge that forfeiture by wrongdoing has typically been used in murder cases (see, e.g., People v. Hanson, 238 Ill. 2d 74, 97 , 939 N.E.2d 238, 252 (2010); People v. Coleman, 2014 IL App (5th) 110274 , 24 N.E.3d 373 ; People v. Peterson, 2012 IL App (3d) 100514-B , 968 N.E.2d 204 ), but we see no reason why that doctrine should not apply in any case in which a defendant has succeeded in undermining the criminal justice system by preventing the trier of fact from hearing all pertinent testimon | 1 | 2015–2015 |
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.