People v. Harris

How courts have described this case

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

• because the language of the charge was not altered, there was no error when the State was permitted to amend the complaint to change the statutory section
• because the language of the charge was not altered, there was no error when the State was permitted to amend the complaint to change the statutory section
• because the language of the charge was not altered, there was no error when the State was permitted to amend the complaint to change the statutory section

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

• People v. Jones
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1997-01-30· cited 225×
• People v. DiLorenzo
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1996-02-15· cited 97×
• People v. Tellez-Valencia
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1999-11-18· cited 58×
• People v. Jones
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1997-05-02· cited 18×
• People v. Walton
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1992-12-04· cited 13×
• People v. Scott
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1996-12-03· cited 11×
• People v. Allen
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1992-11-16· cited 1×

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• United States v. Campos-Serrano
  Supreme Court· 1971-12-20· cited 217×
• People v. Pujoue
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1975-09-26· cited 201×
• People v. McBrien
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1986-06-03· cited 34×
• People v. Johnson
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1979-03-19· cited 15×
• People v. Clutts
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1976-11-15· cited 15×
• People v. Edwards
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1990-03-21· cited 13×
• People v. Gann
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1986-02-21· cited 10×
• People v. Stanley
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1976-09-07· cited 7×