People v. Young

How courts have described this case

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

• In murder and robbery trial, the prior inconsistent, out-of-court statements by a co-conspirator were admissible as substantive evidence when witness changed his story at trial.
• In murder and robbery trial, the prior inconsistent, out-of-court statements by a co-conspirator were admissible as substantive evidence when witness changed his story at trial.
• section 115-10.1 is constitutional and allows for substantive use of a prior inconsistent statement under specified circumstances
• section 115-10.1 is constitutional and allows for substantive use of a prior inconsistent statement under specified circumstances

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• James v. Wilson
  Court of Appeals of Kentucky· 2002-04-19· cited 187×
• People v. Rivera
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1995-06-22· cited 46×
• Moran v. Erickson
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1998-06-10· cited 28×
• People v. Edwards
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1999-12-20· cited 23×

Cites

11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• California v. Green
  Supreme Court· 1970-06-23· cited 3,363×
• Lee v. Illinois
  Supreme Court· 1986-06-03· cited 1,066×
• Cruz v. New York
  Supreme Court· 1987-04-21· cited 734×
• People v. Cox
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1980-10-17· cited 580×
• People v. Joseph
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1986-06-20· cited 124×
• People v. Rolfingsmeyer
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1984-02-01· cited 74×
• People v. Spicer
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1979-10-19· cited 57×
• People v. Hastings
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1987-09-22· cited 32×
• The People v. Hawkinson
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1927-02-16· cited 21×
• People v. Winfield
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1987-09-08· cited 19×
• People v. Vandiver
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1984-08-23· cited 11×