Appellate Court of Illinois· 1/16/1998

People v. Rush

Citations

689 N.E.2d 669
294 Ill. App. 3d 334
228 Ill. Dec. 610
1998 Ill. App. LEXIS 19

How courts have described this case

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

\Proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt does not require proof -7- No. 1-17-2058 beyond any possibility of a doubt\
“[e]vidence which tends to establish that the accused had a motive for killing the victim is relevant, *** if the evidence, at least to a slight degree, tends to establish the motive relied on, [and] is also competent.”
“Evidence that tends to establish that the accused had a motive for killing the victim is relevant, and if the evidence, at least to a slight degree, tends to establish the motive relied on, it is also competent.”
State has right to comment on evidence in closing argument and make any reasonable inference therefrom, even if it is unfavorable to defendant; and, a trial court’s instructions to jury that closing argument is not evidence cures any error resulting from State’s remarks
“Counsel’s failure to present irrelevant evidence is not incompetence”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Rarick

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

29 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.