People v. Ousley

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that a potentially forfeited claim of legally inconsistent verdicts should be reviewed under the plain error doctrine
• The “defendant’s failure to raise the issue of the jury’s legally inconsistent verdicts at trial or in a post-trial motion does not result in a waiver of that issue because legally inconsistent verdicts present plain error, the exception to the rule of waiver.” (Citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Givens v. State
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2016-08-22· cited 26×
• People v. Ruppel
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1999-03-22· cited 23×
• People v. Bush
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2022-05-18· cited 10×
• People v. Rivera
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2011-04-07· cited 5×
• State v. Chyung
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2017-04-18

Cites

10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• People v. Enoch
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1988-02-11· cited 3,273×
• Arizona v. Washington
  Supreme Court· 1978-02-21· cited 2,314×
• People v. Friedman
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1980-03-28· cited 148×
• People v. Frias
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1983-12-16· cited 83×
• People v. Klingenberg
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1996-04-18· cited 58×
• People v. Benniefield
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1980-09-08· cited 17×
• People v. Fornear
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1996-08-19· cited 12×
• People v. Boshears
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1992-05-08· cited 11×
• People v. Anderson
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1990-08-08· cited 9×
• People v. Smith
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1993-06-07· cited 6×