People v. DiGuida

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that a supermarket had not “presented itself as a forum for free expression” under the free speech provision of the Illinois Constitution
• stating that the invocation of a criminal trespass statute to exclude the circulator of a political nominating petition from a private store's premises did not violate free elections provisions in the Illinois Constitution
• referring to a 1984 decision in which this court indicated it would interpret section 6 of the Illinois Bill of Rights as consistent with its counterpart, the fourth amendment to the federal constitution
• referring to a 1984 decision in which this court indicated it would interpret section 6 of the Illinois Bill of Rights as consistent with its counterpart, the fourth amendment to the federal constitution
• rejecting defendant's free speech and free elections challenge as a means to challenge his conviction for criminal trespass to private store owner's land
• free-standing grocery store does not \present[ ] itself as a forum for free expression\ because does not give \impression that its property was public in nature and open to expressive activities\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).