defendant cites rule (Illinois) · Go Syfert
← Illinois issues

defendant cites rule in Illinois

5 Illinois opinions name it 1 courts 1974–2020 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.

Followed or applied (2)

CaseFollowedCited
People v. Benitezgreen
ill · 1996 · cited in 1 Illinois opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020
1 sentence

2020We disagree. ¶ 60 “Formal defects [in a charging instrument] can be corrected on motion by the State’s Attorney or the defendant at any time, provided there is no resulting surprise or prejudice to the defendant.” People v. Benitez, 169 Ill. 2d 245, 255 (1996).

11
People v. Smithgreen
illappct · 1984 · cited in 1 Illinois opinions naming this issue, 2011–2011
1 sentence

2011The circumstances in People v. Smith, 127 Ill.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (2)

CaseCitedYears
Anson v. Haywood green
ill · 1947
2 sentences

1987The defendant cites the rule from Anson v. Haywood (1947), 397 Ill. 370 , 74 N.E.2d 489 , that the execution of a will out of harmony and inconsistent with an alleged oral contract to will is admissible evidence bearing upon the improbability of the existence of such a contract.

1987The defendant cites the rule from Anson v. Haywood (1947), 397 Ill. 370 , 74 N.E.2d 489 , that the execution of a will out of harmony and inconsistent with an alleged oral contract to will is admissible evidence bearing upon the improbability of the existence of such a contract.

21987–1987
People Ex Rel. Houston v. Frye green
ill · 1966
2 sentences

1974Houston v. Frye, 35 Ill. 2d 591 , 221 N.E.2d 287 , which was stated by our Supreme Court as follows: “The rule is clear that such post-trial activity, including the imposition of sentence, may not be indefinitely postponed, for public policy and the effective enforcement of the criminal law require reasonable promptness in those areas of its administration where specific time limitations are not imposed.

1974Houston v. Frye, 35 Ill. 2d 591 , 221 N.E.2d 287 , which was stated by our Supreme Court as follows: “The rule is clear that such post-trial activity, including the imposition of sentence, may not be indefinitely postponed, for public policy and the effective enforcement of the criminal law require reasonable promptness in those areas of its administration where specific time limitations are not imposed.

11974–1974

Where else courts name it

TN 6 (1979–2022) IL 5 (1974–2020) OK 3 (1937–1977) CT 3 (1982–2003) LA 3 (1983–1996) MA 2 (1982–1989)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check