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 2015–2023 3 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. Richardsongreen2 sentences2015App. 3d 537 (2007) (Richardson I), the supreme court said: "However, at the suppression hearing, defendant presented no evidence or argument of any mental deficiency that would render his inculpatory statement involuntary, and the circuit court made no findings relating thereto." (Emphasis added.) People v. Richardson, 234 Ill. 2d 233, 263 (2009) (Richardson II). 2015App. 3d 537 (2007) (Richardson I), the supreme court said: “However, at the suppression hearing, defendant presented no evidence or argument of any mental deficiency that would render his inculpatory statement involuntary, and the circuit court made no findings relating thereto.” (Emphasis added.) People v. Richardson, 234 Ill. 2d 233, 263 (2009) (Richardson II). | 2 | 2 |
People v. Jonesgreen2 sentences2015People v. Jones, 175 Ill. 2d 126, 132 (1997). 2015People v. Jones, 175 Ill. 2d 126, 132 (1997). | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Sebby
green
2 sentences2021Instead, we simply find defendant was incapable of waiving his Miranda rights and it was error to deny defendant’s motion to suppress. ¶ 35 Having found it was clear and obvious error to deny defendant’s motion to suppress based on Detective Hufford’s Miranda violation and that it was cognizable under first-prong plain error, we must determine whether the error was prejudicial error, i.e., because the evidence was so closely balanced, “the error alone severely threatened to tip the scales of justice.” Sebby, 2017 IL 119445, ¶ 51 . 2021Instead, we simply find that defendant was incapable of waiving his Miranda rights and it was error to deny defendant’s motion to suppress. ¶ 35 Having found it was clear and obvious error to deny defendant’s motion to suppress based on Detective Hufford’s Miranda violation and that it was cognizable under first-prong plain error, we must determine whether the error was prejudicial error, i.e., because the evidence was so closely balanced, “the error alone severely threatened to tip the scales of justice.” Sebby, 2017 IL 119445, ¶ 51 . | 2 | 2021–2021 |
People v. Richardson
green
2 sentences2015It is a worse understatement to say that Richardson was not prejudiced by his defense counsel's mistakes because every step of the way, from the trial court, through the appellate court and to the supreme court, every decision has emphasized that there was "no evidence" and "not a scintilla of evidence" to support the defense. ¶ 45 The trial court said: "[I]f there were any – and I will emphasize any – credible evidence to support a reckless act I would have given the involuntary instruction." (Emphasis added.) And: "There is not one scintilla of evidence that the defendant did anything but be 2015It is a worse understatement to say that Richardson was not prejudiced by his defense counsel’s mistakes because every step of the way, from the trial court, through the appellate court and to the supreme court, every decision has emphasized that there was “no evidence” and “not a scintilla of evidence” to support the defense. ¶ 45 The trial court said: “[I]f there were any–and I will emphasize any–credible evidence to support a reckless act I would have given the involuntary instruction.” (Emphasis added.) And: “There is not one scintilla of evidence that the defendant did anything but beat t | 2 | 2015–2015 |
People v. Rouse
green
1 sentence2023Therefore, in Knapp, the court merely looked at other admonishments to determine whether a defendant’s claim of an involuntary waiver was positively rebutted by the record. ¶ 33 Recently, and after the parties filed their briefs, we issued the decision in People v. Rouse, 2022 IL App (1st) 210761 . | 1 | 2023–2023 |
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.