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.
3 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 10 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from People v. Pinkonsly.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | People v. Pinkonsly Anchor | green | “section 2-1401 proceedings are not an appropriate forum for ineffective-assistance claims because such claims do not challenge the factual basis for the judgment.” | 4 |
| 2 | People v. Jacobs | green | “an area that falls within the ambit of trial strategy and cannot sustain an ineffectiveness claim” | 3 |
| 3 | In re Alonzo O. | green | “such a hearing will give defendant a full opportunity to prove facts establishing ineffectiveness of counsel, the state a full opportunity to present evidence to the contrary, and the establishment of a factual record on the issue.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.