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.
7 Illinois opinions name it 1 courts 2014–2017 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. Kirchnergreen2 sentences2017People v. Kirchner, 194 Ill. 2d 502, 553 (2000). ¶ 109 There is a conflict regarding the correct standard for reviewing a prosecutor’s remarks during argument. 2017People v. Kirchner, 194 Ill. 2d 502, 553 (2000). ¶ 109 There is a conflict regarding the correct standard for reviewing a prosecutor’s remarks during argument. | 2 | 2 |
People v. Hudsongreen2 sentences2017In People v. Anderson, 2017 IL App (1st) 122640 , 72 N.E.3d 726 , the First District cited an earlier decision of the Illinois Supreme Court in People v. Hudson, 157 Ill. 2d 401, 441 , 626 N.E.2d 161, 178 (1993), where the supreme court “suggested that [an appellate court] should review this issue for an abuse of discretion.” Anderson, 2017 IL App (1st) 122640, ¶ 109 , 72 N.E.3d 726 . 2017In People v. Anderson, 2017 IL App (1st) 122640 , 72 N.E.3d 726 , the First District cited an earlier decision of the Illinois Supreme Court in People v. Hudson, 157 Ill. 2d 401, 441 , 626 N.E.2d 161, 178 (1993), where the supreme court “suggested that [an appellate court] should review this issue for an abuse of discretion.” Anderson, 2017 IL App (1st) 122640, ¶ 109 , 72 N.E.3d 726 . | 2 | 2 |
People v. Thompsongreen2 sentences2014See Thompson, 238 Ill. 2d at 613 ("The first step of plain-error review is determining whether any error occurred."). ¶ 35 There is a conflict regarding the correct standard for reviewing a prosecutor's remarks during argument. 2014See Thompson, 238 Ill. 2d at 613 (“The first step of plain-error review is determining whether any error occurred.”). ¶ 35 There is a conflict regarding the correct standard for reviewing a prosecutor’s remarks during argument. | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Daniel
green
2 sentences2017People v. Daniel, 2014 IL App (1st) 121171 , ¶ 32. 2017People v. Daniel, 2014 IL App (1st) 121171 , ¶ 32. | 5 | 2014–2017 |
People v. Anderson
green
2 sentences2017In People v. Anderson, 2017 IL App (1st) 122640 , 72 N.E.3d 726 , the First District cited an earlier decision of the Illinois Supreme Court in People v. Hudson, 157 Ill. 2d 401, 441 , 626 N.E.2d 161, 178 (1993), where the supreme court “suggested that [an appellate court] should review this issue for an abuse of discretion.” Anderson, 2017 IL App (1st) 122640, ¶ 109 , 72 N.E.3d 726 . 2017In People v. Anderson, 2017 IL App (1st) 122640 , 72 N.E.3d 726 , the First District cited an earlier decision of the Illinois Supreme Court in People v. Hudson, 157 Ill. 2d 401, 441 , 626 N.E.2d 161, 178 (1993), where the supreme court “suggested that [an appellate court] should review this issue for an abuse of discretion.” Anderson, 2017 IL App (1st) 122640, ¶ 109 , 72 N.E.3d 726 . | 2 | 2017–2017 |
People v. Blue
green
1 sentence2015Id. at 131-32 . ¶ 37 We recognize the conflict regarding the correct standard for reviewing a prosecutor’s remarks during argument. | 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.