evidence adduced hearing in Illinois

2017Jones, 215 Ill. 2d at 274 . ¶ 46 Although the parties devote a significant portion of their briefs to discussing what information the officers had regarding the prior drug transaction and the description of defendant and his vehicle, the evidence adduced at the hearing on the motion to suppress demonstrates probable cause existed to search the vehicle along I-80 based on Rico’s positive alert to the presence of narcotics in defendant’s vehicle.

2017Jones, 215 Ill. 2d at 274 . ¶ 46 Although the parties devote a significant portion of their briefs to discussing what information the officers had regarding the prior drug transaction and the description of defendant and his vehicle, the evidence adduced at the hearing on the motion to suppress demonstrates probable cause existed to search the vehicle along I-80 based on Rico’s positive alert to the presence of narcotics in defendant’s vehicle.

2021Lopez, 2018 IL App (1st) 170733, ¶ 70 . ¶ 30 In this case, the Board’s order accurately recited the evidence adduced at the hearing.

2020Lopez, 2018 IL App (1st) 170733, ¶ 70 . ¶ 30 In this case, the Board’s order accurately recited the evidence adduced at the hearing.

2011The Graves court declined to consider this contention, explaining, "To attempt to consider and review the evidence adduced at a hearing which was commenced by charges so inadequate as to hamper the preparation of a defense would be an exercise in reductio ad absurdum. " Graves, 55 Ill.App.3d at 892 , 13 Ill.Dec. 651 , 371 N.E.2d at 370 .

2011The Graves court declined to consider this contention, explaining, "To attempt to consider and review the evidence adduced at a hearing which was commenced by charges so inadequate as to hamper the preparation of a defense would be an exercise in reductio ad absurdum. " Graves, 55 Ill.App.3d at 892 , 13 Ill.Dec. 651 , 371 N.E.2d at 370 .

2006Such efforts to actively exploit their positions within [the plaintiff] for their own personal benefits, and to hinder [the plaintiffs] ability to conduct its business with [the customer], if proved at trial, constitute a breach of fiduciary duty.” Foodcomm, 328 F.3d at 304 .

2006Such efforts to actively exploit their positions within [the plaintiff] for their own personal benefits, and to hinder [the plaintiff=s] ability to conduct its business with [the customer], if proved at trial, constitute a breach of fiduciary duty.@ Foodcomm, 328 F.3d at 304 .

2004In response, the State cites People v. McGreal, 4 Ill.

2004In response, the State cites People v. McGreal, 4 Ill.App.3d 312 , 278 N.E.2d 504 (1971), for its holding that the "`discovery of the offense' mean [s] gaining knowledge of or finding out that a penal statute has been violated," and the proposition that, in order to discover something, knowledge, and not mere suspicion, is required.

1997Burgess , 176 Ill. 2d at 298-300 .

1997Burgess, 176 Ill. 2d at 298-300 .

2025Id. ¶ 35 The evidence adduced at the hearing on the motion to suppress established that after the defendant was arrested at the victim’s house, he was transported to the MVPD, where he was interviewed by Detective Koontz, while Detective Osborn observed.

2023In re T.M.H., 2019 IL App (2d) 190614, ¶ 37 . ¶ 73 Here, petitioner argues that, in his appellate brief, respondent “presents numerous arguments that are not supported by the record whatsoever.” Specifically, petitioner points out that, “[i]n total, [respondent’s] argument section spans 19 pages, but contains a mere 10 citations to the record, many of which are not directly connected to or relevant to the issues argued on appeal or the evidence adduced at hearing.” For this reason, petitioner asserts that respondent’s “brief should be stricken and his appeal dismissed.” ¶ 74 In return, respond

2022Even assuming, arguendo, that defendant is correct in asserting that an appointment as an investigator is not valid in the absence of the submission of the applicant’s fingerprints to the State Police, Fencl’s fingerprints were submitted to the State Police -8- 2022 IL App (2d) 190846 in 2010, five years before he began his investigation of defendant.

2021The evidence adduced at the hearing provided the trial court with at least three alternative bases upon which it could have granted defendant relief: (1) defendant was arrested in the absence of probable cause before the police determined whether he legally possessed a firearm; (2) defendant was improperly followed and detained in the - 18 - No. 1-19-1630 absence of reasonable suspicion of criminal activity; and (3) defendant was illegally searched in the absence of a reasonable belief that defendant was armed and dangerous. ¶ 66 Defendant misplaces reliance on People v. Bloxton, 2020 IL App (

2019People v. Motzko, 2017 IL App (3d) 160154 . 1 A thorough accounting of the evidence adduced at the hearing on defendant’s motion to suppress evidence may be found in People v. Motzko, 2017 IL App (3d) 160154, ¶¶ 4-10 . -2- ¶7 On remand, the State filed a motion in limine to admit the records of defendant’s medical treatment at the hospital following his accident.

2019People v. Motzko, 2017 IL App (3d) 160154 . 1 A thorough accounting of the evidence adduced at the hearing on defendant’s motion to suppress evidence may be found in People v. Motzko, 2017 IL App (3d) 160154, ¶¶ 4-10 . -2- ¶7 On remand, the State filed a motion in limine to admit the records of defendant’s medical treatment at the hospital following his accident.

2018App. 3d 738 , 743, 268 Ill.Dec. 364 , 778 N.E.2d 350 (2002). ¶ 31 At the outset, we note that the Code's definition of "foreign substance" was never before the trial court, and the court was never asked to consider it in conjunction with the evidence adduced at the hearing.

2018App. 3d 738 , 743, 268 Ill.Dec. 364 , 778 N.E.2d 350 (2002). ¶ 31 At the outset, we note that the Code's definition of "foreign substance" was never before the trial court, and the court was never asked to consider it in conjunction with the evidence adduced at the hearing.

2016In Fair, the court held, "a petitioner who alleges that his trial judge's corruption violated his right to a fair trial must establish (1) a 'nexus' between the judge's corruption or criminal conduct in other cases and the judge's conduct at petitioner's trial; and (2) actual bias resulting from the judge's extrajudicial conduct." Id. at 261 (quoting People v. Titone, 151 Ill. 2d 19, 30-31 (1992)).

2016While we now must consider the case under the different standards applicable to our review following a third-stage evidentiary hearing, this court's earlier characterization remains no less accurate even in light of the evidence adduced at that hearing. ¶ 44 This case requires us to apply the nexus rule established by People v. Fair, 193 Ill. 2d 256 (2000), to an unusual set of facts which the Fair court had no occasion to consider.

2015The court noted that defendant could have been charged with a Class 4 felony but that the State had declined to do so. -3- 2015 IL App (2d) 131267 ¶9 At defendant’s forfeiture hearing later that day, the parties stipulated to the evidence adduced at the hearing on defendant’s motion to quash his arrest and suppress evidence.

2014Under the plain and ordinary meaning of the statutory language, the court’s determination that section 8-803 barred Chaplain Fricks’ testimony is not supported by the evidence adduced at the hearing. - 32 - 2014 IL App (2d) 121001 ¶ 96 The trial court found compelling N.H.’s expectation of confidentiality, but this court has held that the penitent’s expectation does not affect the application of section 8-803.

2009Luedemann, 222 Ill. 2d at 550 . -11- No. 2--08--0245 mechanically apply Laake but, instead, considered the totality of the circumstances.

1998The matter herein is similar to McLean Trucking Co. v. Industrial Comm’n, 96 Ill. 2d 213 , 449 N.E.2d 832 (1983), where the Commission allowed claimant to amend his application for adjustment of claim to conform to the evidence adduced at hearing.

1998The matter herein is similar to McLean Trucking Co. v. Industrial Comm’n, 96 Ill. 2d 213 , 449 N.E.2d 832 (1983), where the Commission allowed claimant to amend his application for adjustment of claim to conform to the evidence adduced at hearing.

1994BATSON HEARING Defendant next contends that the State engaged in purposeful discrimination when it exercised its peremptory challenges in a racially discriminatory manner in violation of Batson v. Kentucky (1986), 476 U.S. 79 , 90 L.

1994BATSON HEARING Defendant next contends that the State engaged in purposeful discrimination when it exercised its peremptory challenges in a racially discriminatory manner in violation of Batson v. Kentucky (1986), 476 U.S. 79 , 90 L.

1994(Wipfler, 68 Ill. 2d at 166 .) In light of the evidence adduced at the hearing for the motion to quash arrest, it was not necessary for defendant to testify as to his subjective beliefs as to whether he felt free to leave the police station; as such, the trial court properly excluded such testimony.

1987App. 3d 1069 , 460 N.E.2d 776 .) Under this older version, the failure to file a sworn report was not incurable as the evidence adduced at the hearing would determine the entire matter.

1987People v. Gaddi (1986), 145 Ill.

1987App. 3d 575 , 494 N.E.2d 1266 .) An agency’s findings concerning factual questions are prima facie true and correct, and the court may not reweigh the evidence adduced at the hearing or substitute its judgment for that of the agency unless the Board’s findings are without substantial support in the record.

1987(Burke v. Board of Review (1985), 132 Ill.

1986App. 3d 387, 391 , 475 N.E.2d 1012 .) Obviously, counsel’s conduct must be judged on the basis of what was known at the time the motion to vacate was filed, not on the evidence adduced at the hearing.

1986App. 3d 1013 , 389 N.E.2d 1230 .) The evidence adduced at the hearing and at trial was substantially the same and showed the arresting officers had probable cause to arrest defendant.

1986(Gregory v. Bernardi (1984), 125 Ill.