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.
5 Illinois opinions name it 1 courts 1994–2021 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. Everettegreen1 sentence2021See, e.g., Everette, 141 Ill. 2d at 156-57 (although defendant in homicide case testified he accidentally killed the victim, defendant was still entitled to an instruction on self- defense where there was some evidence in the record which, if believed by a jury, would support the defense). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Herrongreen1 sentence2008Thus, "[p]rejudice to *** defendant is presumed" (People v. Herron, 215 Ill. 2d 167, 187 (2005)), and we therefore reverse and remand for a new trial. -17- No. 2--06--0384 The court in Rice, we recognize, applied a harmless-error analysis to the instruction on self- defense. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
The People v. Dukes
green
1 sentence2015The Dukes court concluded "[t]his testimony was insufficient to require an instruction on self- defense." Id. at 540 . ¶ 66 In this case, defense counsel's request for a self-defense instruction was based on an attempt to combine the State's evidence that defendant shot Simms with defense evidence from which the defense sought to infer that defendant feared for his safety, although no direct evidence was introduced by either side that defendant was in fear for his life or had a reasonable apprehension of a confrontation. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
People v. Jefferson
green
1 sentence2007People v. Jefferson, 257 Ill. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
People v. Bryant
green
2 sentences1994The courts will not indulge a hindsight analysis to determine whether the attorney's decision was reasonably adequate under the circumstances. ( People v. Bryant (1989), 128 Ill.2d 448, 458 , 132 Ill.Dec. 415 , 539 N.E.2d 1221 .) To prevail on a claim that his trial counsel was ineffective for advancing a particular theory or for failing to submit particular instructions to the jury, the defendant must show that the instructions would have been given and that the trial outcome would have been different. 1994The courts will not indulge a hindsight analysis to determine whether the attorney's decision was reasonably adequate under the circumstances. ( People v. Bryant (1989), 128 Ill.2d 448, 458 , 132 Ill.Dec. 415 , 539 N.E.2d 1221 .) To prevail on a claim that his trial counsel was ineffective for advancing a particular theory or for failing to submit particular instructions to the jury, the defendant must show that the instructions would have been given and that the trial outcome would have been different. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
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.