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.
9 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 1984–2019 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. Burpogreen2 sentences2015Accordingly, “an interpretation that renders a statute valid is always presumed to have been intended by the legislature.” Id. ¶ 34 A statute is unconstitutionally vague, and violates due process, “only if the terms of the statute are so ill-defined ‘that the ultimate decision as to its meaning rests on the opinions and whims of the trier of fact rather than any objective criteria or facts.’ ” People v. Molnar, 222 Ill. 2d 495, 524 (2006) (quoting People v. Burpo, 164 Ill. 2d 261, 265-66 (1995)). 2014Accordingly, "an interpretation that renders a statute valid is always presumed to have been intended by the legislature." Id. ¶ 34 A statute is unconstitutionally vague, and violates due process, "only if the terms of the statute are so ill-defined 'that the ultimate decision as to its meaning rests on the opinions and whims of the trier of fact rather than any objective criteria or facts.' " People v. Molnar, 222 Ill. 2d 495, 524 (2006) (quoting People v. Burpo, 164 Ill. 2d 261, 265-66 (1995)). | 2 | 2 |
People v. Molnargreen2 sentences2015Accordingly, “an interpretation that renders a statute valid is always presumed to have been intended by the legislature.” Id. ¶ 34 A statute is unconstitutionally vague, and violates due process, “only if the terms of the statute are so ill-defined ‘that the ultimate decision as to its meaning rests on the opinions and whims of the trier of fact rather than any objective criteria or facts.’ ” People v. Molnar, 222 Ill. 2d 495, 524 (2006) (quoting People v. Burpo, 164 Ill. 2d 261, 265-66 (1995)). 2014Accordingly, "an interpretation that renders a statute valid is always presumed to have been intended by the legislature." Id. ¶ 34 A statute is unconstitutionally vague, and violates due process, "only if the terms of the statute are so ill-defined 'that the ultimate decision as to its meaning rests on the opinions and whims of the trier of fact rather than any objective criteria or facts.' " People v. Molnar, 222 Ill. 2d 495, 524 (2006) (quoting People v. Burpo, 164 Ill. 2d 261, 265-66 (1995)). | 2 | 2 |
In Re TWgreen2 sentences2007I recognize that, in In re T.W., we upheld the amendment in the face of a constitutional challenge, on separation of powers grounds, holding that People v. Phillips, 66 Ill. 2d 412 (1977), was “dispositive of the issue.” See In re T.W., 101 Ill. 2d at 441. 2007I recognize that, in In re T.W., we upheld the amendment in the face of a constitutional challenge, on separation of powers grounds, holding that People v. Phillips, 66 Ill.2d 412 , 6 Ill.Dec. 215 , 362 N.E.2d 1037 (1977), was "dispositive of the issue." See In re T.W., 101 Ill.2d at 441 , 79 Ill. | 2 | 2 |
People v. Ricegreen2 sentences2012People v. Rice, 257 Ill.App.3d 220, 228-29 , 195 Ill.Dec. 373 , 628 N.E.2d 837 (1993) (rejecting constitutional challenge to life sentence imposed upon 16-year-old defendant with mild mental retardation). ¶ 68 We next consider the defendant's crimes; convictions on two counts of first degree murder. 2012People v. Rice, 257 Ill.App.3d 220, 228-29 , 195 Ill.Dec. 373 , 628 N.E.2d 837 (1993) (rejecting constitutional challenge to life sentence imposed upon 16-year-old defendant with mild mental retardation). ¶ 68 We next consider the defendant's crimes; convictions on two counts of first degree murder. | 1 | 2 |
In Re JWgreen1 sentence2019In determining whether a statute violates due process, we must first " 'determine the nature of the right purportedly infringed upon by the statute.' " Id. (quoting In re J.W., 204 Ill. 2d 50, 66 (2003)). | 1 | 1 |
Jackson v. City of Chicagogreen1 sentence2019We resolve any doubts about a statute’s constitutionality in favor of its validity and we must affirm a statute in the face of a constitutional challenge so long as it is “ ‘reasonably capable of such a determination.’ ” Jackson v. City of Chicago, 2012 IL App (1st) 111044, ¶ 20 (quoting People v. One 1998 GMC, 2011 IL 110236, ¶ 20 ). ¶ 15 "Substantive due process bars the government from arbitrarily exercising its power without the reasonable justification of serving a legitimate interest." People v. Pollard, 2016 IL App (5th) 130514, ¶ 31 (citing Daniels v. Williams, 474 U.S. 327, 331 (1986) | 1 | 1 |
People v. Pollardgreen1 sentence2019We resolve any doubts about a statute’s constitutionality in favor of its validity and we must affirm a statute in the face of a constitutional challenge so long as it is “ ‘reasonably capable of such a determination.’ ” Jackson v. City of Chicago, 2012 IL App (1st) 111044, ¶ 20 (quoting People v. One 1998 GMC, 2011 IL 110236, ¶ 20 ). ¶ 15 "Substantive due process bars the government from arbitrarily exercising its power without the reasonable justification of serving a legitimate interest." People v. Pollard, 2016 IL App (5th) 130514, ¶ 31 (citing Daniels v. Williams, 474 U.S. 327, 331 (1986) | 1 | 1 |
Daniels v. Williamsgreen2 sentences2019We resolve any doubts about a statute’s constitutionality in favor of its validity and we must affirm a statute in the face of a constitutional challenge so long as it is “ ‘reasonably capable of such a determination.’ ” Jackson v. City of Chicago, 2012 IL App (1st) 111044, ¶ 20 (quoting People v. One 1998 GMC, 2011 IL 110236, ¶ 20 ). ¶ 15 "Substantive due process bars the government from arbitrarily exercising its power without the reasonable justification of serving a legitimate interest." People v. Pollard, 2016 IL App (5th) 130514, ¶ 31 (citing Daniels v. Williams, 474 U.S. 327, 331 (1986) 2019In determining whether a statute violates due process, we must first " 'determine the nature of the right purportedly infringed upon by the statute.' " Id. (quoting In re J.W., 204 Ill. 2d 50, 66 (2003)). | 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. Bailey
green
2 sentences2015When interpreting a statute in the face of a constitutional challenge, we must remember to “ascertain and give effect to the legislature’s intent in enacting the statute.” Bailey, 167 Ill. 2d at 225 . 2015Accordingly, “an interpretation that renders a statute valid is always presumed to have been intended by the legislature.” Id. ¶ 34 A statute is unconstitutionally vague, and violates due process, “only if the terms of the statute are so ill-defined ‘that the ultimate decision as to its meaning rests on the opinions and whims of the trier of fact rather than any objective criteria or facts.’ ” People v. Molnar, 222 Ill. 2d 495, 524 (2006) (quoting People v. Burpo, 164 Ill. 2d 261, 265-66 (1995)). | 2 | 2014–2015 |
People v. Phillips
green
2 sentences2007I recognize that, in In re T.W., we upheld the amendment in the face of a constitutional challenge, on separation of powers grounds, holding that People v. Phillips, 66 Ill. 2d 412 (1977), was “dispositive of the issue.” See In re T.W., 101 Ill. 2d at 441. 2007I recognize that, in In re T.W., we upheld the amendment in the face of a constitutional challenge, on separation of powers grounds, holding that People v. Phillips, 66 Ill.2d 412 , 6 Ill.Dec. 215 , 362 N.E.2d 1037 (1977), was "dispositive of the issue." See In re T.W., 101 Ill.2d at 441 , 79 Ill. | 2 | 2007–2007 |
People v. One 1998 GMC
green
1 sentence2019We resolve any doubts about a statute’s constitutionality in favor of its validity and we must affirm a statute in the face of a constitutional challenge so long as it is “ ‘reasonably capable of such a determination.’ ” Jackson v. City of Chicago, 2012 IL App (1st) 111044, ¶ 20 (quoting People v. One 1998 GMC, 2011 IL 110236, ¶ 20 ). ¶ 15 "Substantive due process bars the government from arbitrarily exercising its power without the reasonable justification of serving a legitimate interest." People v. Pollard, 2016 IL App (5th) 130514, ¶ 31 (citing Daniels v. Williams, 474 U.S. 327, 331 (1986) | 1 | 2019–2019 |
In re T.W.
green
1 sentence2007I recognize that, in In re T.W., we upheld the amendment in the face of a constitutional challenge, on separation of powers grounds, holding that People v. Phillips, 66 Ill.2d 412 , 6 Ill.Dec. 215 , 362 N.E.2d 1037 (1977), was "dispositive of the issue." See In re T.W., 101 Ill.2d at 441 , 79 Ill. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
People v. Goodman
green
2 sentences1988Under Dutton, as adopted by our supreme court in People v. Goodman (1980), 81 Ill. 2d 278 , 408 N.E.2d 215 , the Supreme Court upheld the admissibility of the statement there in the face of a constitutional challenge under circumstances similar to those presented here. 1988Under Dutton, as adopted by our supreme court in People v. Goodman (1980), 81 Ill. 2d 278 , 408 N.E.2d 215 , the Supreme Court upheld the admissibility of the statement there in the face of a constitutional challenge under circumstances similar to those presented here. | 1 | 1988–1988 |
Matayka v. Melia
green
1 sentence1984Matayka v. Melia (1983), 119 Ill. | 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.