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.
6 Illinois opinions name it 1 courts 2016–2024 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
The People v. Delislegreen2 sentences2024See People v. DeLisle, 374 Ill. 437, 439-40 (1940). 2024See People v. DeLisle, 374 Ill. 437, 439-40 (1940). | 2 | 2 |
People v. Rathbonegreen2 sentences2020App. 3d 305, 309 , 802 N.E.2d 333, 337 (2003), this court held a defendant can forfeit a claim the trial court erred in sentencing him for his conduct on probation rather than for his original offense by failing to raise the claim in a postsentencing motion. 2020App. 3d 305, 309 , 802 N.E.2d 333, 337 (2003), this court held a defendant can forfeit a claim the trial court erred in sentencing him for his conduct on probation rather than for his original offense by failing to raise the claim in a post-sentencing motion. | 2 | 2 |
People v. Hilliergreen2 sentences2016See People v. Hillier, 237 Ill. 2d 539, 545 (2010) (outlining requirements of plain-error rule in sentencing context); People v. Ramirez, 2015 IL App (1st) 130022, ¶ 21 (same). ¶ 42 Here, defendant does not make a plain-error argument, let alone invoke the rule. 2016See People v. -8- Hillier, 237 Ill. 2d 539, 545 (2010) (outlining requirements of plain-error rule in sentencing context); People v. Ramirez, 2015 IL App (1st) 130022, ¶ 21 (same). ¶ 42 Here, defendant does not make a plain-error argument, let alone invoke the rule. | 2 | 2 |
People v. Ramirezgreen2 sentences2016See People v. Hillier, 237 Ill. 2d 539, 545 (2010) (outlining requirements of plain-error rule in sentencing context); People v. Ramirez, 2015 IL App (1st) 130022, ¶ 21 (same). ¶ 42 Here, defendant does not make a plain-error argument, let alone invoke the rule. 2016See People v. -8- Hillier, 237 Ill. 2d 539, 545 (2010) (outlining requirements of plain-error rule in sentencing context); People v. Ramirez, 2015 IL App (1st) 130022, ¶ 21 (same). ¶ 42 Here, defendant does not make a plain-error argument, let alone invoke the rule. | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
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.