People v. Riddle

How courts have described this case

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

• breed or type of dog alone insufficient to support finding that dog was “vicious” so as to justify officers’ noncompliance with “knock and announce” mie
• the warrant or the record must show that the occupants of the premises had devised a means for the quick destruction of evidence; otherwise, the mere presence of drugs would not provide exigent circumstances

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

10 cases in this archive cite this case.

• People v. Moser
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2005-05-18· cited 33×
• Klitzka Ex Rel. Teutonico v. Hellios
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2004-05-17· cited 32×
• People v. Williams
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2000-06-30· cited 26×
• GOENNENWEIN BY GOENNENWEIN v. Rasof
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1998-05-21· cited 20×
• Conway v. Pasadena Humane Society
  California Court of Appeal· 1996-05-08· cited 18×
• Commonwealth v. Santiago
  Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 2008-11-17· cited 10×
• Goennenwein v. Rasof
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1998-05-21
• People v. Aaron
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1998-05-11
• People v. Willliams
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2000-06-30
• Klitzka v. Hellios
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2004-05-17

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• People v. Melock
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1992-07-30· cited 219×
• People v. Condon
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1992-03-12· cited 107×
• People v. D.G.
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1991-10-17· cited 104×
• People v. Saechao
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1989-09-20· cited 27×
• People v. Leach
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1993-01-08· cited 17×
• People v. Jennings
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1990-11-07· cited 5×