8 Illinois opinions name it 1 courts 2014–2025 1 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. Bowengreen2 sentences2014Simon, 2011 IL App (1st) 091197, ¶ 91 (where a record contains affirmative evidence that the trial court did not accurately recall or consider crucial defense evidence when deciding judgment, defendant did not receive a fair trial); Bowen, 241 Ill. 2014Simon, 2011 IL App (1st) 091197, ¶ 91 (where a record contains affirmative evidence that the trial court did not accurately recall or consider crucial defense evidence when deciding judgment, defendant did not receive a fair trial); Bowen, 241 Ill. | 2 | 2 |
People v. Simongreen2 sentences2014Simon, 2011 IL App (1st) 091197, ¶ 91 (where a record contains affirmative evidence that the trial court did not accurately recall or consider crucial defense evidence when deciding judgment, defendant did not receive a fair trial); Bowen, 241 Ill. 2014Simon, 2011 IL App (1st) 091197, ¶ 91 (where a record contains affirmative evidence that the trial court did not accurately recall or consider crucial defense evidence when deciding judgment, defendant did not receive a fair trial); Bowen, 241 Ill. | 2 | 2 |
People v. Williamsgreen2 sentences2025See, e.g., People v. Williams, 2013 IL App (1st) 111116, ¶ 103 (“with a claim of mistaken recall, the record contains affirmative evidence that the trial court made a mistake in its decision-making process, thereby undercutting the presumption that serves as the very foundation for the deferential standard of review in an insufficient evidence claim-that the trial court accurately recalled and considered all the evidence”). 2016Instead of the highly deferential standard applied to a trial court’s ruling in an insufficient evidence claim, we review de novo the - 46 - 1-15-0312 question of whether the record reveals that the trial court made an affirmative mistake in its decision-making process. [Citation.]” People v. Williams, 2013 IL App (1st) 111116, ¶¶ 102-104 . ¶ 106 First, defendant argues the trial court erroneously rejected Dr. Barnes’ opinion of the likelihood of rebleeding in Dylan’s head on the grounds Dr. Barnes did not address the extent of Dylan’s retinal hemorrhages. | 1 | 4 |
People v. Siguenza-Britogreen1 sentence2020People v. Siguenza- Brito, 235 Ill. 2d 213, 224 (2009). “ ‘[T]he reviewing court must allow all reasonable inferences from the record in favor of the prosecution.’ ” People v. Wheeler, 226 Ill. 2d 92, 116-17 (2007) - 10 - No. 1-17-1327 (quoting People v. Cunningham, 212 Ill. 2d 274, 280 (2004)). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Wheelergreen1 sentence2020People v. Siguenza- Brito, 235 Ill. 2d 213, 224 (2009). “ ‘[T]he reviewing court must allow all reasonable inferences from the record in favor of the prosecution.’ ” People v. Wheeler, 226 Ill. 2d 92, 116-17 (2007) - 10 - No. 1-17-1327 (quoting People v. Cunningham, 212 Ill. 2d 274, 280 (2004)). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Cunninghamgreen1 sentence2020People v. Siguenza- Brito, 235 Ill. 2d 213, 224 (2009). “ ‘[T]he reviewing court must allow all reasonable inferences from the record in favor of the prosecution.’ ” People v. Wheeler, 226 Ill. 2d 92, 116-17 (2007) - 10 - No. 1-17-1327 (quoting People v. Cunningham, 212 Ill. 2d 274, 280 (2004)). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Teaguegreen1 sentence2020See People v. Teague, 2013 IL App (1st) 110349, ¶¶ 22-23 (whether a defendant had the intent to kill required for attempted murder was an issue of the sufficiency of the evidence). | 1 | 1 |
People v. K.S.green1 sentence2014Cf. People v. K.S., 387 Ill. | 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. Baskerville
green
2 sentences2014People v. Baskerville, 2012 IL 111056, ¶ 31 . ¶ 103 By contrast, with a claim of mistaken recall, the record contains affirmative evidence that the trial court made a mistake in its decision-making process, thereby undercutting the presumption that serves as the very foundation for the deferential standard of review in an insufficient evidence claim–that the trial court accurately recalled and considered all the evidence. 2014People v. Baskerville, 2012 IL 111056, ¶ 31 . ¶ 103 By contrast, with a claim of mistaken recall, the record contains affirmative evidence that the trial court made a mistake in its decision-making process, thereby undercutting the presumption that serves as the very foundation for the deferential standard of review in an insufficient evidence claim -- that the trial court accurately recalled and considered all the evidence. | 2 | 2014–2014 |
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.