Appellate Court of Illinois· 2/8/2002
People v. C.J.
Citations
- 328 Ill. App. 3d 103
- 764 N.E.2d 1153
- 262 Ill. Dec. 36
- 2002 Ill. App. LEXIS 96
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that, although police initially took juvenile into custody, juvenile arrested on drug charge did not have standing to challenge constitutionality of pretrial detention statute in relation to his drug case, where juvenile was never detained for drug offense
- stating that in a juvenile proceeding the formal rules of evidence are relaxed and that “all evidence shall be admissible if it is relevant and reliable”
- holding that, although police initially took juvenile into custody, juvenile arrested on drug charge did not have standing to challenge constitutionality of pretrial detention statute in relation to his drug case, where juvenile was never detained for drug offense
- holding that, although police initially took juvenile into custody, juvenile arrested on drug charge did not have standing to challenge constitutionality of pretrial detention statute in relation to his drug case, where juvenile was never detained for drug offense
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Buckley
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
8 cases in this archive cite this case.
- In Re Billy W.Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2005-06-13· cited 25×
- People v. Randall M.Illinois Supreme Court· 2008-09-18· cited 9×
- People v. M.T.Appellate Court of Illinois· 2004-02-06· cited 5×
- People v. M.T.Appellate Court of Illinois· 2004-08-27· cited 5×
- In Re CJAppellate Court of Illinois· 2002-02-08· cited 2×
- In Re MTAppellate Court of Illinois· 2004-02-06· cited 2×
- In re Randall M.Illinois Supreme Court· 2008-09-18
- People v. T.W.Appellate Court of Illinois· 2008-04-21
Cites
21 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court· 1970-05-18· cited 11,712×
- In Re GAULTSupreme Court· 1967-05-15· cited 5,473×
- Allen v. WrightSupreme Court· 1984-09-18· cited 4,763×
- Gerstein v. PughSupreme Court· 1975-02-18· cited 4,350×
- Kent v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1966-03-22· cited 2,202×
- Coleman v. AlabamaSupreme Court· 1970-06-22· cited 1,808×
- McKeiver v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court· 1971-06-28· cited 1,332×
- Gallegos v. ColoradoSupreme Court· 1962-06-25· cited 716×
- Middendorf v. HenrySupreme Court· 1976-03-24· cited 335×
- People v. MalchowIllinois Supreme Court· 2000-09-21· cited 309×
- People v. W.C.Illinois Supreme Court· 1995-10-19· cited 281×
- Glisson v. City of MarionIllinois Supreme Court· 1999-10-21· cited 248×
- Arangold Corp. v. ZehnderIllinois Supreme Court· 1999-07-01· cited 170×
- Russell v. Department of Natural ResourcesIllinois Supreme Court· 1998-10-01· cited 136×
- Chicago Teachers Union, Local 1 v. Board of EducationIllinois Supreme Court· 2000-01-21· cited 85×
- Miller v. RosenbergIllinois Supreme Court· 2001-04-19· cited 83×
- People v. A.G.Illinois Supreme Court· 2001-03-22· cited 65×
- Randolph Williams v. H. Wayne Kobel, Donald Blankenship, and Paul A. O'NealSeventh Circuit· 1986-04-23· cited 45×
- People v. WoodruffIllinois Supreme Court· 1981-12-18· cited 36×
- People v. FranklinAppellate Court of Illinois· 1979-12-27· cited 25×
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.