Appellate Court of Illinois· 11/30/2009

People v. Alexander

Citations

919 N.E.2d 1016
396 Ill. App. 3d 563
336 Ill. Dec. 91
2009 Ill. App. LEXIS 1187

How courts have described this case

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

noting that “when defining ‘structural error’, the Glasper court quoted language in Herron that describes the substantial rights prong of the plain error test”
noting that “when defining ‘structural error’, the Glasper court quoted language in Herron that describes the substantial rights prong of the plain error test”
finding that the difference between the current and previous versions of Rule 431(b) did not preclude application of the Glasper rationale to the trial court’s noncompliance with the current version of the rule
finding the difference between the former and amended versions of Rule 431(b) did not preclude application of Glasper’s rationale
finding automatic reversal not warranted under plain-error analysis for violations of amended Rule 431(b)
reconsidering prior opinion in light of Glasper and holding same result warranted, i.e., no reversible plain error where trial court informed the potential jurors during voir dire of all four principles, but did not specifically ask them if they understood and accepted those principles

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Carter, McDade

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

15 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

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

Other cases with this 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.