People v. Freeman

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the defendant’s reputation for carrying a weapon, coupled with other evidence, led the officer to reasonably believe that the defendant may have been carrying a weapon when he was stopped on a subsequent date
• noting that the defendant's reputation for carrying a weapon, coupled with other evidence, led the officer to reasonably believe that the defendant may have been carrying a weapon when he was stopped on a subsequent date
• noting that “[tjhere is no requirement, statutory or otherwise, that the officer conducting a stop-and-frisk specify a particular offense, so long as the officer reasonably may infer that a violation of any penal statute in Illinois has been or may be committed by the person detained”
• protective frisk was justified, notwithstanding the defendant had not displayed a weapon to complainant and the officer had backup assistance, because the officer knew through official police channels that the defendant had a reputation for carrying weapons

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• People v. Anthony V.
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2002-12-06· cited 8×
• People v. Austin
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2006-05-01· cited 7×
• People v. Holland
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2005-04-04· cited 7×

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Terry v. Ohio
  Supreme Court· 1968-06-10· cited 37,942×
• People v. Collins
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1985-02-22· cited 2,507×
• People v. Reynolds
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1983-02-04· cited 160×
• People v. Holloway
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1981-06-04· cited 113×
• People v. Neal
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1985-11-21· cited 74×
• People v. Vollrath
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1981-04-30· cited 4×
• People v. Fairman
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1989-05-04· cited 3×