People v. Bergin

How courts have described this case

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

• court held that proof of intimidation was not undercut by the unlikelihood that defendant would have harmed the victim’s children due to his good relationship with the children
• court held that proof of intimidation was not undercut by the unlikelihood that defendant would have harmed the victim's children due to his good relationship with the children
• while defendant argued that his intent was not to detain the victim when he put a pillow over her face, the court noted that defendant’s argument mistakenly focused on his lack of motive to restrain the victim “when the key word in the statute is knowingly.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).