People v. Smith

How courts have described this case

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

• the statement by defense counsel, \That's fine\, in response to a trial date suggested by the prosecution, did not constitute an express agreement to a continuance

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

• People v. Staten
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1994-07-28· cited 125×
• People v. Sojak
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1995-06-02· cited 30×
• People v. Williams
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1995-03-20· cited 22×
• People v. Healy
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1997-12-04· cited 17×
• People v. Schmidt
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1992-09-04· cited 16×
• People v. Jones
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1995-08-14· cited 10×
• People v. Moore
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1994-04-18· cited 8×
• People v. Staten
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1992-11-02· cited 3×

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• People v. Turner
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1989-04-20· cited 201×
• People v. Adams
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1989-10-25· cited 147×
• People v. Gooding
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1975-09-26· cited 40×
• People v. Grant
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1982-04-07· cited 29×
• People v. Cunningham
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1979-11-13· cited 29×
• People v. Manna
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1981-04-30· cited 21×