Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

People v. Kuhns

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided April 17, 2007No. 2-05-0442Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice Gilleran Johnson

I agree that the defendant’s conviction should be affirmed. I also believe that the defendant is entitled to a $5 credit for the time that he was incarcerated on July 11, 2004. However, because I believe that the majority’s analysis is flawed in its determination that the defendant is entitled to a $5 credit for less than one hour that he spent in custody on July 10, 2004, I must dissent from that portion of the majority’s opinion.

At the outset, I note that the majority incorrectly frames the issue that the defendant is raising before this court. In his reply brief, the defendant acknowledges…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. In re Donald A.G.Illinois Supreme Court · 2006
  2. People v. HareIllinois Supreme Court · 1988
  3. People Ex Rel. Morrison v. SielaffIllinois Supreme Court · 1974
  4. People v. SmithAppellate Court of Illinois · 1994
  5. People v. StahrAppellate Court of Illinois · 1994

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API