Flowers v. Clary

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that trial court’s summary dismissal order, entered after the matter was remanded for the trial court’s failure to substantively review defendant’s post-conviction claims, was void, as it occurred more than 90 days after the docketing of the petition
• holding that a trial judge should have been disqualified from hearing the defendant’s postconviction petition because the judge had been a prosecutor in the original prosecution of the defendant in the same case
• holding that trial court’s summary dismissal order, entered after the matter was remanded for the trial court’s failure to substantively review defendant’s postconviction claims, was void, as it occurred more than 90 days after the docketing of the petition
• applying Storms and concluding that a post-conviction proceeding is sufficiently related to the original prosecution that it falls within the scope of the Illinois rule
• applying Storms and concluding that a post-conviction proceeding is sufficiently related to the original prosecution that it falls within the scope of the Illinois rule
• judge’s failure to rule on petition within statutory 90-day time frame required that petition be advanced to second stage

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).