Criminal Justice Section Council ContributionsBy Julia Kaye WykoffCriminal Justice, July 2024A summary of the impact the Criminal Justice Section Council has made to the Illinois State Bar Association and statewide criminal law community over the past few years.
Guilty Pleas Following People v. WellsBy Hon. Randy RosenbaumCriminal Justice, July 2024The Illinois Supreme Court considered whether a defendant is entitled to additional jail credit after a negotiated plea in People v. Wells.
Judicial Notice and Expert TestimonyBy Alan DownenCriminal Justice, July 2024In People v. Heineman, the Illinois Supreme Court held that administrative regulations have the force and effect of law, not fact, meaning that when a circuit court takes judicial notice of an Illinois administrative rule it accepts that rule’s existence but not its truth.
Bevis v. City of Naperville and the Current State of the Second AmendmentBy Benjamin LawsonCriminal Justice, March 2024An overview of how we arrived at our present state of ambiguity about the second amendment’s scope and what the seventh circuit’s recent ruling in Bevis v. City of Naperville can tell us, if anything, about where we’re headed.
Is Silence an Admission?By Terrence WallaceCriminal Justice, March 2024In People v. Pinkett, the Illinois Supreme Court recently held that a defendant’s post arrest silence was neither material nor relevant to show consciousness of guilt.
Is Silence an Admission?By Terrence WallaceTraffic Laws and Courts, March 2024In People v. Pinkett, the Illinois Supreme Court recently held that a defendant’s post arrest silence was neither material nor relevant to show consciousness of guilt.
Voluntary Intoxication to Negate Specific Intent? People v. Grayer Gives the Green LightBy Mark Kevin Wykoff, Sr.Criminal Justice, March 2024The Illinois Supreme Court recently considered whether evidence of voluntary intoxication is relevant to the issue of intent given that the legislature amended section 6-3 of the Criminal Code of 1961, removing voluntary intoxication as an affirmative defense
Constructive Possession in People v. Teranza JonesBy Kellyn Doyle CoakleyCriminal Justice, October 2023In People v. Teranza Jones, the Illinois Supreme Court considered constructive possession by affirming the lower appellate court’s decision.
Mens Rea Requirement Necessary for a Conviction on Possession of a Defaced FirearmBy Jessica KoesterCriminal Justice, October 2023In People v. Ramirez, the Illinois Supreme Court held that the state must prove that a defendant knew that the serial number on the firearm had been altered or defaced in order to secure a conviction for possession of a defaced firearm.
Automatic Substitution of Judge Wrongfully DeniedBy Donald J. RamsellCriminal Justice, February 2023In People v. Brusaw, the appellate court considered what happens when a defendant files a motion for substitution of judge and the motion is never acted upon.
Pre-Trial Fairness Act: Elimination of Cash Bail Held in AbeyanceBy Julia Kaye WykoffCriminal Justice, February 2023The most controversial component of the Pretrial Fairness Act, eliminating cash bail, was scheduled to become effective on January 1, 2023—however, it was declared unconstitutional in the weeks leading up to the effective date.
The Changing Landscape of Juvenile Offenders & Armed Habitual CriminalBy Daniel L. Fultz & Julia Kaye WykoffCriminal Justice, December 2022Recently, the Illinois Supreme Court addressed whether a juvenile’s conviction constitutes a qualifying offense for purposes of Class X sentencing under section 5-4.5-95(b) of the Unified Code of Corrections.
Evaluating Structural Error following People v. Jackson, 2022 IL 127256By Julia Kaye WykoffCriminal Justice, November 2022In People v. Jackson, the Illinois Supreme Court considered whether the trial court’s error in polling only 11 of 12 jurors constituted “structural error” for purposes of applying the second prong of Illinois’s plain error rule.
Inappropriate Comment in Rebuttal Closing Argument?By Hon. Randall B. RosenbaumCriminal Justice, November 2022In People v. Mudd, the Illinois Supreme Court considered whether the prosecutor made an inappropriate comment in rebuttal closing argument.
Practice Pointer: Is a Jury Trial Waiver Irrevocable in All Circumstances? Not Always.By Mark Kevin Wykoff, Julia Kaye Wykoff, & Daniel FultzCriminal Justice, November 2022In People v. Bracey, the defendant argued before the appellate court that his jury waiver, executed prior to his first trial, was not valid with respect to his second trial.
Casenote: Evans v. Cook County State’s AttorneyBy Alan C. DownenCriminal Justice, April 2022In Evans v. Cook County State’s Attorney, the Illinois Supreme Court considered whether Alfred Evans, Jr. should have been issued a Firearm Owner’s Identification card.
Casenote: People v. JohnsonBy Mark Kevin Wykoff & Julia Kaye WykoffCriminal Justice, April 2022In People v. Johnson, the Illinois Supreme Court considered whether defense counsel’s failure to seek the testing of a potentially exculpatory DNA sample constituted the ineffective assistance of counsel.
Casenote: People v. HartfieldBy Mark Kevin Wykoff, Sr.Criminal Justice, September 2021In People v. Hartfield, the appellate court considered whether Kelvin Hartfield’s speedy-trial rights were violated.
Legislative Updates at a GlanceBy Kristine HoniotesCriminal Justice, September 2021A summary of notable changes to criminal justice legislation caused by the passing of house bills 3653 and 3443.
People v. Aguilar: Its Misunderstood ProgenyBy James NaughtonCriminal Justice, September 2021An analysis of People v. Aguilar and how its findings should affect expungements for aggravated unlawful use of a weapon convictions going forward.
