People v. Walczak

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the defendant “could have done a better job advancing his claim of lack of sufficient basis to preserve it for appeal” but that “because we prefer to address issues on their merits where possible, we will address the merits of Armstrong’s claim here”
• noting our preference to address issues on their merits where possible

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).