Illinois Supreme Court· 1/23/1998
People v. Williams
Citations
- 692 N.E.2d 1109
- 181 Ill. 2d 297
- 229 Ill. Dec. 898
- 1998 Ill. LEXIS 5
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- finding that an objection at the sentencing hearing and reference to the error in a postsentencing motion are necessary to preserve a sentencing issue for review
- assuming the invalidity of a statutory aggravating factor, finding that the jury’s consideration of this factor did not require resentencing
- considering merits of issues in order to determine that counsel was not ineffective for having failed to preserve them
- admitting contents of 911 tape to show officer acting in the course of his official duties
- admitting contents of 911 tape to show officer acting in the course of his official duties
- considering merits of issues in order to determine that counsel was not ineffective for having failed to preserve them
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Freeman
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
113 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- People v. HallIllinois Supreme Court· 2000-10-26· cited 566×
- People v. KlinerIllinois Supreme Court· 1998-12-03· cited 564×
- People v. CaffeyIllinois Supreme Court· 2001-10-18· cited 527×
- People v. WilliamsIllinois Supreme Court· 2000-10-12· cited 413×
- People v. EasleyIllinois Supreme Court· 2000-05-25· cited 356×
- People v. BussIllinois Supreme Court· 1999-04-15· cited 285×
- People v. ChapmanIllinois Supreme Court· 2000-12-01· cited 260×
- People v. BrooksIllinois Supreme Court· 1999-06-17· cited 253×
- People v. FullerIllinois Supreme Court· 2002-02-22· cited 218×
- People v. WagenerIllinois Supreme Court· 2001-06-01· cited 218×
- People v. VillarrealIllinois Supreme Court· 2001-12-06· cited 211×
- People v. ShawIllinois Supreme Court· 1999-06-01· cited 203×
- People v. NievesIllinois Supreme Court· 2000-11-16· cited 184×
- People v. TerrellIllinois Supreme Court· 1998-12-31· cited 179×
- People v. WilliamsIllinois Supreme Court· 2004-03-18· cited 157×
- People v. SegovianoIllinois Supreme Court· 2000-02-17· cited 151×
- People v. CejaIllinois Supreme Court· 2003-04-17· cited 145×
- People v. EmersonIllinois Supreme Court· 2000-04-03· cited 133×
- People v. DurrIllinois Supreme Court· 2005-05-19· cited 117×
- People v. BallardIllinois Supreme Court· 2002-12-02· cited 116×
Cites
54 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court· 1984-06-25· cited 123,578×
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court· 1966-06-13· cited 58,288×
- Mincey v. ArizonaSupreme Court· 1978-06-21· cited 3,849×
- Payne v. TennesseeSupreme Court· 1991-09-13· cited 3,458×
- People v. EnochIllinois Supreme Court· 1988-02-11· cited 3,273×
- Harris v. New YorkSupreme Court· 1971-02-24· cited 2,903×
- Caldwell v. MississippiSupreme Court· 1985-06-11· cited 2,827×
- Estelle v. SmithSupreme Court· 1981-05-18· cited 2,053×
- Lee v. IllinoisSupreme Court· 1986-06-03· cited 1,066×
- People v. YoungIllinois Supreme Court· 1989-02-22· cited 643×
- Reck v. PateSupreme Court· 1961-06-12· cited 543×
- People v. CaballeroIllinois Supreme Court· 1984-03-23· cited 434×
- People v. WilliamsIllinois Supreme Court· 1983-05-27· cited 322×
- People v. GreerIllinois Supreme Court· 1980-02-22· cited 298×
- People v. PaschIllinois Supreme Court· 1992-10-01· cited 295×
- People v. BrownellIllinois Supreme Court· 1980-03-21· cited 290×
- People v. WardIllinois Supreme Court· 1984-03-23· cited 289×
- Beecher v. AlabamaSupreme Court· 1967-10-23· cited 283×
- People v. WilliamsIllinois Supreme Court· 1994-05-19· cited 272×
- People v. PhillipsIllinois Supreme Court· 1989-03-29· cited 270×
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.