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.
7 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 63 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. Wilson.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | People v. Wilson Anchor | green | “there can be no plain error if there was no error at all .” | 22 |
| 2 | People v. Nowells | green | “notice is not necessary when the prior conviction is a required element of the offense, such that only one class of felony conviction is possible for that offense as alleged in the charging instrument.” | 11 |
| 3 | People v. Jackson | green | “indeed, this court has previously held that an asportation of less than one block and a detention of a few minutes were sufficient to support a separate kidnaping conviction.” | 6 |
| 4 | People v. Quintana | green | “in order for the asportation or detention to be inherent in a separate offense, it must constitute an element of that offense.” | 6 |
| 5 | People v. Nowells | green | “section 111-3(c) notice provision does not apply in the instant case because the state did not seek to enhance the defendant's sentence; as alleged in the indictment, defendant's class 2 sentence was the only statutorily allowed sentence available in this situation.” | 6 |
| 6 | People v. McCarter | green | “because the defendant's challenge is directed at the quantum of evidence presented against him, the correct standard of review is that which applies to the sufficiency of the evidence challenge.” | 6 |
| 7 | People v. McCarter | green | “when a defendant challenges incriminating inferences that may have been drawn by the trier of fact from the evidence, the challenge constitutes a claim against the sufficiency of the evidence.” | 6 |
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.