Appellate Court of Illinois· 6/26/2009

People v. Sharp

Citations

909 N.E.2d 971
391 Ill. App. 3d 947
330 Ill. Dec. 949
2009 Ill. App. LEXIS 545

How courts have described this case

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

noting that statements were “substantially consistent” as a factor in favor of the statement’s reliability
explaining that, because the declarant appeared for cross-examination, the introduction of her hearsay statements “did not implicate the confrontation clause”
noting that a delay in reporting an assault or initial denials of an assault will not automatically render a victim’s statements inadmissible under section 115-10 of the Code
declining to review a prosecutorial misconduct claim for plain error because “the prosecutor’s allegedly improper comments were not overly extensive”
finding a 33-day delay in reporting did not render a victim’s statements inadmissible under section 115-10
“When conducting a section 115-10 hearing, a trial court must evaluate the totality of the circumstances surrounding the making of the hearsay statements.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Steigmann

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

15 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

26 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.