People v. LaGrone

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the trial court failed to make the specific factual findings needed to justify even a short denial
• holding that “the trial court failed to make specific factual findings” justifying closure, without stating whether it was applying a de novo or abuse of discretion standard
• holding that the trial court failed to make the specific factual findings needed to justify even a short denial
• holding that “the trial court failed to make specific factual findings” justifying closure, without stating whether it 46 No. 1-08-1728 was applying a de novo or abuse of discretion standard
• holding in an interlocutory appeal filed by the media that the trial court erred by not making adequate factual findings on the record to justify denying public access to a hearing on the defendant’s motions in limine
• “opening the [criminal] process to neutral observers is an important means of assuring the fairness of criminal proceedings”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).