Appellate Court of Illinois· 12/13/2004

People v. Thomas

Citations

821 N.E.2d 628
354 Ill. App. 3d 868
290 Ill. Dec. 316
2004 Ill. App. LEXIS 1486

How courts have described this case

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

generally, a prior inconsistent statement is admissible solely for impeachment purposes, not as substantive evidence of the truth of the matter asserted
generally, a prior inconsistent statement is admissible solely for impeachment purposes, not as substantive evidence of the truth of the matter asserted
“[I]n general, a prior inconsistent statement is admissible solely for impeachment purposes, not as substantive evidence of the truth of the matter asserted.”
accomplice’s statements from his own trial that implicated the defendant, which he recanted at the defendant’s trial, could lead a rational jury to conclude that the accomplice told the truth at his own trial but lied at the defendant’s trial
accomplice's statements from his own trial that implicated the defendant, which he recanted at the defendant's trial, could lead a rational jury to conclude that the accomplice told the truth at his own trial but lied at the defendant's trial

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cahill

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

28 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.