People v. Funches

How courts have described this case

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

• noting “an inference is merely a deduction that the fact finder may draw in its discretion, but is not required to draw as a matter of law”
• addressing limits on federal and state legislatures’ power to “make the proof of one fact or group of facts evidence of the existence of the ultimate fact on which guilt is predicated” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• addressing limits on federal and state legislatures' power to \make the proof of one fact or group of facts evidence of the existence of the ultimate fact on which guilt is predicated\
• addressing limits on federal and state legislatures' power to \make the proof of one fact or group of facts evidence of the existence of the ultimate fact on which guilt is predicated\ (internal quotation marks omitted); see People v. Pomykala, 203 Ill. 2d 198, 203 (2003
• an inference is merely a deduction that the fact finder may draw in its discretion but is not required to draw as a matter of law; the fact finder is free to accept or reject the suggested inference
• an inference is merely a deduction that the fact finder may draw in its discretion but is not required to draw as a matter of law; the fact finder is free to accept or reject the suggested inference

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).