People v. Eugene W.

How courts have described this case

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

• affirming finding of unfitness where respondent had been previously found unfit and failed to produce evidence that he had taken steps to correct the conditions that led to the previous unfitness determination
• affirming finding of unfitness where respondent had been previously found unfit and failed to produce evidence that he had taken steps to correct the conditions that led to the previous unfitness determination
• noting, “the fifth amendment right against self-incrimination applies to juvenile proceedings” and a service plan “may not compel counseling or therapy requiring the parent to admit to committing a crime”
• applying de novo review to the applicability of the collateral estoppel doctrine
• “The standard of review for determining whether an individual’s [fifth amendment] rights have been violated is de novo.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.)
• “ ‘[e]ach case concerning the adjudication of minors *** must be reviewed according to its own facts’ ” (quoting In re Arthur H., 212 Ill. 2d at 468-69)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).