This is the April 2019 Illinois criminal case law audio round-up (the fast case law summary). Episode 624 (Duration 26:35)
The April 2019 Top Illinois Criminal Law Cases (The Monthly Round-Up)
Here’s a quick snapshot of the top cases:
1. People v. Brandt
Police use the their own sense of smell to go get a warrant for a house.
2. People v. Rice
A strong indication from the 3rd district on what the smell of weed means for a car search.
3. People v. Kimble
Judge declared a mistrial kind of early, still double jeopardy was not implicated.
4. People v. Buffer
Illinois Supreme Court says anything over 40 years is a de facto life sentence.
5. People v. Phagan
Sections of the attempt statutes should be read disjuntively meaning the court can only apply one of those sentencing enhancements.
6. People v. Foreman
A felony DWLR can’t be used to sentence and individual as a mandatory X sentence.
7. People v. Olson
Defendant got IDOC even though the victim wanted him on probation.
8. People v. Rodriguez-Palomino
Is it ever appropriate to give out a discretionary consecutive sentence after a life sentence has been imposed?
9. People v. Stefanski
The employment admonishment is a substantive change that does not need to be applied retroactively.
10. People v. Sturgeon
Trial court said there was no trial tax here and that drug addiction is not necessarily a factor in mitigation.
11. People v. Nemec
His DUI supervision was revoked without a lawyer.
12. People v. Williams
Extra jurisdictional DUI arrest is upheld because of some annexation paperwork.
13. People v. Curry
Defendant was not admonished correctly on his probation violation admission reversal is required.
14. People v. Markham
State says overdose immunity should not kick in since defendant was feeling good enough to ask for his wallet and keys.
15. People v. Clifton
Unduly suggestive ID, you make the call photos provided here.
16. People v. Coger
One-Act One-Crime principles prevent 2 drug convictions in this case even though the lab said there was both cocaine and heroin in there.
17. People v. Campbell
Court is not insensitive to claims of “dropsy” testimony and “testilying”.
18. People v. Fort
Defendant was trying to fix his credit with a CPN instead they arrested him.
19. In re M.H.
With 11 year old accused minor sexual gratification is not so obvious.
20. People v. Nolan
Trial judge grants defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment in part because the officer did not testify in the hearing.
21. People v. Shoonover
Judge clears the courtroom when the child takes the stand, was that proper?