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 1973–2023 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 |
|---|---|---|
Smith v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2016See Smith v. United States, 568 U.S. ___ , ___, 133 S. Ct. 714, 719 (2013) (while the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt every fact necessary to constitute the crime with which the defendant is charged, the government has no constitutional duty to overcome an affirmative defense beyond a reasonable doubt). ¶ 38 Defendant is receiving a windfall in this case, which, as the dissent correctly states, is “offensive to a legal system that should uphold the rule of law over procedural sleight of hand” (infra ¶ 59), and which runs counter to the purpose of the statute of limitations. 2015See Smith v. United States, 568 U.S. ___ , ___, 133 S. Ct. 714, 719 (2013) (while the government must prove beyond a reasonable - 14 - 2015 IL App (2d) 140139 doubt every fact necessary to constitute the crime with which the defendant is charged, the government has no constitutional duty to overcome an affirmative defense beyond a reasonable doubt). ¶ 38 Defendant is receiving a windfall in this case, which, as the dissent correctly states, is “offensive to a legal system that should uphold the rule of law over procedural sleight of hand” (infra ¶ 59), and which runs counter to the purpose of | 3 | 3 |
People v. Luttergreen2 sentences2015See Smith v. United States, 568 U.S. ___ , ___, 133 S. Ct. 714, 719 (2013) (while the government must prove beyond a reasonable - 14 - 2015 IL App (2d) 140139 doubt every fact necessary to constitute the crime with which the defendant is charged, the government has no constitutional duty to overcome an affirmative defense beyond a reasonable doubt). ¶ 38 Defendant is receiving a windfall in this case, which, as the dissent correctly states, is “offensive to a legal system that should uphold the rule of law over procedural sleight of hand” (infra ¶ 59), and which runs counter to the purpose of 2015See Smith v. United States, 568 U.S. ___ , ___, 133 S. Ct. 714, 719 (2013) (while the government must prove beyond a reasonable - 14 - 2015 IL App (2d) 140139 doubt every fact necessary to constitute the crime with which the defendant is charged, the government has no constitutional duty to overcome an affirmative defense beyond a reasonable doubt). ¶ 38 Defendant is receiving a windfall in this case, which, as the dissent correctly states, is “offensive to a legal system that should uphold the rule of law over procedural sleight of hand” (infra ¶ 59), and which runs counter to the purpose of | 2 | 2 |
People v. Gillgreen1 sentence2023People v. Gill, 2018 IL App (3d) 150594, ¶ 98 (citing Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752, 762 (1969)). ¶ 39 The State relies on two exceptions: (1) inventory searches of lawfully impounded vehicles conducted per standard police procedure (South Dakota v. Opperman, 428 U.S. 364 (1976)), and (2) searches of automobiles when an officer has probable cause to believe the automobile may contain contraband or evidence of a crime (Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132 (1925)). ¶ 40 C. | 1 | 1 |
Chimel v. Californiared1 sentence2023People v. Gill, 2018 IL App (3d) 150594, ¶ 98 (citing Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752, 762 (1969)). ¶ 39 The State relies on two exceptions: (1) inventory searches of lawfully impounded vehicles conducted per standard police procedure (South Dakota v. Opperman, 428 U.S. 364 (1976)), and (2) searches of automobiles when an officer has probable cause to believe the automobile may contain contraband or evidence of a crime (Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132 (1925)). ¶ 40 C. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Carroll v. United States
green
1 sentence2023People v. Gill, 2018 IL App (3d) 150594, ¶ 98 (citing Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752, 762 (1969)). ¶ 39 The State relies on two exceptions: (1) inventory searches of lawfully impounded vehicles conducted per standard police procedure (South Dakota v. Opperman, 428 U.S. 364 (1976)), and (2) searches of automobiles when an officer has probable cause to believe the automobile may contain contraband or evidence of a crime (Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132 (1925)). ¶ 40 C. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
South Dakota v. Opperman
green
1 sentence2023People v. Gill, 2018 IL App (3d) 150594, ¶ 98 (citing Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752, 762 (1969)). ¶ 39 The State relies on two exceptions: (1) inventory searches of lawfully impounded vehicles conducted per standard police procedure (South Dakota v. Opperman, 428 U.S. 364 (1976)), and (2) searches of automobiles when an officer has probable cause to believe the automobile may contain contraband or evidence of a crime (Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132 (1925)). ¶ 40 C. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
People v. McDonald
green
2 sentences2009McDonald, 168 Ill. 2d at 460 , 660 N.E.2d at 849 . 2009McDonald, 168 Ill. 2d at 460 , 660 N.E.2d at 849 . | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Schneckloth v. Bustamonte
green
2 sentences1994However, the United States Supreme Court, in Schneckloth v. Bustamonte (1973), 412 U.S. 218 , 36 L. 1994However, the United States Supreme Court, in Schneckloth v. Bustamonte (1973), 412 U.S. 218 , 36 L. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
People v. Evans
green
2 sentences1973In People v. Evans (1972), 3 Ill.App.3d 435 , 278 N.E.2d 401 , this court held, in answer to the contention of counsel therein, that these admonishments as prescribed by Supreme Court Rule 402 (Ill. 1973In People v. Evans (1972), 3 Ill.App.3d 435 , 278 N.E.2d 401 , this court held, in answer to the contention of counsel therein, that these admonishments as prescribed by Supreme Court Rule 402 (Ill. | 1 | 1973–1973 |
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.