Illinois Supreme Court· 6/19/1997

People v. Smith

Citations

685 N.E.2d 880
177 Ill. 2d 53
226 Ill. Dec. 425
1997 Ill. LEXIS 394

How courts have described this case

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

“Notwithstanding defendant’s argument that cross-examination of [the witness] might have been treated differently, we cannot say that trial counsel’s approach fell outside the wide range of reasonable professional assistance and, thus, defendant’s trial counsel was not deficient.”
“declin[ing] to apply a per se rule that a defendant [should] be granted a new trial whenever his or her counsel is involved in proceedings 31 No. 1-21-0186 with the ARDC” and instead “review[ing] the defendant’s claims under the Strickland ineffective assistance of counsel test”
Miller, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part, joined by Heiple and Bilandic, JJ.
the defendant had no criminal record, the murder was motivated by the defendant’s husband’s affair, and the murder was an isolated incident
defendant solicited the murder, participated in the acquisition of the murder weapon, and provided her car to the principals
new evidence merely served to impeach main witness and was “insufficient to warrant - 24 - a new trial”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Nickels, Freeman, McMorrow, Miller, Bilandic, Heiple

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

61 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

61 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.