Legal Opinion · Concurrence

People v. Herrin

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided September 25, 2008No. 3-06-0924Published

1Concurrence

JUSTICE SCHMIDT,

specially concurring:

I concur with the majority’s opinion that defendant’s probation was improperly terminated. However, I disagree with the majority’s analysis and, therefore, write separately.

Defendant’s initial contention is that the trial court lacked authority to act upon the petition to revoke her probation when it entered its November 20, 2006, order. As this contention raises a question of law, we review it de novo. People v. Caballes, 221 Ill. 2d 282, 289, 851 N.E.2d 26, 31 (2006).

Defendant’s argument is based on the theories and reasoning discussed in People v.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. People v. CaballesIllinois Supreme Court · 2006
  2. People v. DingerIllinois Supreme Court · 1990
  3. People v. BaileyAppellate Court of Illinois · 2007
  4. People v. KellemsAppellate Court of Illinois · 2007
  5. People v. ClarkAppellate Court of Illinois · 2000

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API