Appellate Court of Illinois· 8/17/2007

People v. Howard

Citations

876 N.E.2d 36
376 Ill. App. 3d 322
315 Ill. Dec. 36
2007 Ill. App. LEXIS 896

How courts have described this case

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

explaining that Carroll did not establish a “bright-line rule that the presentation of a suspect to witnesses while flanked by police automatically calls an identification into question”
explaining that Carroll did not establish a “bright-line rule that the presentation of a suspect to witnesses while flanked by police automatically calls an identification into question”
discussing the trial court’s discretion to appoint new counsel for a criminal defendant where necessary to “preserve the integrity of the judicial process and ensure that the proceedings appear[ed] fair to all who observe[d] them” (internal quotation marks omitted)
when dealing with a motion to withdraw under Rule 13(c)(3), a trial court has ‘broad discretion’
when dealing with a motion to withdraw under Rule 13(c)(3), a trial court has “broad discretion”
when dealing with a motion to withdraw under Rule 13(c)(3), a trial court has 'broad discretion'

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Gallagher

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

13 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

34 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.