 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Torres v. Walker, NO. 4-05-0813,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FOURTH DISTRICT, April 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Dismissal of mandamus petition was affirmed. Although petition could be based on a due process violation, inmate failed to establish any such violation; disciplinary committee properly assessed witness credibility, due process did not require polygraph testing, and committee's summary reports complied with Ill. Adm. Code tit. 20, § 504.80.
|
|||||
| People v. Young, No. 1-04-2176,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, FIRST DIVISION, April 24, 2006, Decided , April 24, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not err in denying defendant's motion to suppress his confession, as he had not been required to incriminate himself in violation of Ill. Const. art. I, § 10; he was informed of Miranda rights, including right to counsel, he did not unambiguously request counsel, and a third-party could not do it for him even though he was a minor.
|
|||||
| People v. Murray, NO. 4-03-0632,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FOURTH DISTRICT, April 25, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's home invasion conviction under 720 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/12-11(a)(5) was reversed. The trial court gave conflicting instructions on the crime, with one instruction properly stating the law and the second making a misstatement of the law.
|
|||||
| People v. Green, No. 2-04-0595,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, SECOND DISTRICT, April 26, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not commit plain error in failing to sua sponte give additional jury instructions on the proof necessary to convict defendant of robbery. However, the trial court committed plain error in entering a judgment of conviction and sentence based on a victim age enhancement when the jury had not ruled on the enhancement.
|
|||||
| Gee v. Treece, NO. 5-04-0728,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIFTH DISTRICT, April 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment in favor of a doctor in a wrongful death case brought by a widow was affirmed because the widow was not entitled to a judgment notwithstanding the verdict as the conflicting expert medical witness testimony was not so overwhelmingly in favor of the widow that a verdict in favor of the doctor could not stand.
|
|||||
| People v. Lee, No. 1-04-2258,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, FOURTH DIVISION, April 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Evidence was sufficient to support defendant's conviction for armed robbery, as defendant did not dispute that he committed a robbery in violation of 720 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/18-1 and the State sufficiently proved through witnesses that defendant did so while carrying a firearm in violation of 720 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/18-2(a)(2).
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
