People v. Howery

How courts have described this case

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

• given the court’s remarks in their entirety, its remark that “there is no evidence of any kind of support a verdict of not guilty” did not shift the burden of proof to the defendant
• “the trial court is presumed to know the law and apply it properly”; only “when the record contains strong affirmative evidence to the contrary” is “that presumption *** rebutted”
• where the evidence was largely circumstantial, evidence of motive, opportunity, presence of accelerant on defendant's clothing on night of fire, and inconsistent statements made following fire were sufficient to convict defendant of arson and first degree murder
• “[T]he trial court is presumed to know the law and apply it properly.”
• convictions for knowing murder were supported by sufficient evidence where investigators determined two separate fires were started in lower levels of a home and the children who were sleeping upstairs were killed
• given the court’s remarks in their entirety, its remark that “there is no evidence of any kind of support a verdict of not guilty” did not shift the burden of proof to the defendant

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).