Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
Illinois Supreme Court· 9/24/2009

In Re Samantha

Citations

  • 917 N.E.2d 487
  • 234 Ill. 2d 359
  • 334 Ill. Dec. 661

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that the failure to apply the one-act, one-crime rule constituted second prong plain error
  • findings of guilt for multiple offenses can only be sustained if the charging instrument reflects the State's intent to apportion the defendant's conduct and prosecute for multiple crimes
  • finding error under the second prong based on the trial court's failure to apply the one-act, one-crime rule
  • most serious count, on which judgment and sentence should be entered, is count that carries highest maximum punishment
  • although minors are not required to file post-dispositional motions, they must \object at trial to preserve a claimed error for review\
  • a one-act, one-crime violation \satisf[ies] the second prong of the plain-error test\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Fitzgerald

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

23 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named In Re Samantha

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.