The PEOPLE v. Lansing

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that, since there was nothing in the language of a 1965 amendment to the Post-Conviction Hearing Act (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1965, ch. 38, ¶ 122-1
• holding that, since there was nothing in the language of a 1965 amendment to the Post-Conviction Hearing Act (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1965, ch. 38, ¶ 122-1
• petitioner’s sixth grade education and unfamiliarity with law insufficient to toll statute

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).