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 2 courts 1991–2016 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 |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Strickland v. Washington
green
2 sentences2016“Taking the unaffected findings as a given, and taking due account of the effect of the errors on the remaining findings, a court making the prejudice inquiry must ask if the defendant has met the burden of showing that the decision reached would reasonably likely have been different absent the errors.” Strickland, 466 U.S. at 696 . ¶ 48 Even assuming that defense counsel should have objected to the introduction of Tate’s written statement, Jones’s oral statements to Mastroianni and Lindmark, and the hearsay portions of McLaurin’s grand jury transcript, defendant has not shown that the jury’s 2015“Taking the unaffected findings as a given, and taking due account of the effect of the errors on the remaining findings, a court making the prejudice inquiry must ask if the defendant has met the burden of showing that the decision reached would reasonably likely have been different absent the errors.” Strickland, 466 U.S. at 696 . ¶ 48 Even assuming that defense counsel should have objected to the introduction of Tate’s written statement, Jones’s oral statements to Mastroianni and Lindmark, and the hearsay portions - 21 - 2015 IL App (2d) 130135 of McLaurin’s grand jury transcript, defendant | 6 | 1991–2016 |
People v. Lofton
green
1 sentence2015“Taking the unaffected findings as a given, and taking due account of the effect of the errors on the remaining findings, a court making the prejudice inquiry must ask if the defendant has met the burden of showing that the decision reached would reasonably likely have been different absent the errors.” Strickland, 466 U.S. at 696 . ¶ 48 Even assuming that defense counsel should have objected to the introduction of Tate’s written statement, Jones’s oral statements to Mastroianni and Lindmark, and the hearsay portions - 21 - 2015 IL App (2d) 130135 of McLaurin’s grand jury transcript, defendant | 1 | 2015–2015 |
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.