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 2005–2023 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. Johnsongreen2 sentences2023If, however, the Boose analysis does not favor using the [restraints], then a new trial would be indicated.” Id. - 12 - ¶ 49 Here, we conclude a retrospective Boose hearing is not necessary and defendant is entitled to a new trial. 2020Clearly the Williams panel was well aware of this tenet, as it chose to ignore another panel’s earlier directive that a retrospective Boose hearing was the appropriate remedy “in all cases where the trial court fails to employ a proper Boose analysis.” (Emphasis added.) Johnson, 356 Ill. | 4 | 7 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Williams
green
2 sentences2020Yet, in Williams, 2016 IL App (3d) 130901, ¶ 33 , one panel of this court created a new test, wherein a retrospective Boose hearing is only considered appropriate where the circuit court originally considered “some of the Boose factors.” The Williams court decided that where none of the Boose factors are considered and the circuit court is presumably applying a “blanket policy,” we should vacate the underlying order and remand for wholly new proceedings. 2020Id. -5- ¶ 28 Since Williams was published in 2016, no court, in this district or elsewhere, has applied the new rule that it created. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
People v. Johnson
green
2 sentences2009As I have stated elsewhere (see People v. Johnson, 356 Ill.App.3d 208 , 292 Ill.Dec. 177 , 825 N.E.2d 765 (2005); People v. Johnson, 387 Ill.App.3d 768 , 327 Ill.Dec. 371 , 902 N.E.2d 126 (2009) (Holdridge, J., dissenting)), I believe the appropriate remedy in cases of this type is to remand for a retrospective Boose hearing. 2009As I have stated elsewhere (see People v. Johnson, 356 Ill.App.3d 208 , 292 Ill.Dec. 177 , 825 N.E.2d 765 (2005); People v. Johnson, 387 Ill.App.3d 768 , 327 Ill.Dec. 371 , 902 N.E.2d 126 (2009) (Holdridge, J., dissenting)), I believe the appropriate remedy in cases of this type is to remand for a retrospective Boose hearing. | 1 | 2009–2009 |