Legal Opinion · Dissent

People v. Abraham

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided March 29, 1977No. 75-134Published

1DissentJustice Stengel

I disagree with the majority opinion insofar as it holds that prosecution under counts III and VIII, which charge defendants with the offense of bribery, were barred by the statute of limitations.

In People v. Liebling (1st Dist. 1976), 36 Ill. App. 3d 1073, 344 N.E.2d 520, the court stated that the limitations period for an offense may be extended by subsequent legislation so long as the accused is not entitled to an absolute bar from prosecution due to the expiration of the former limitations period as of the effective date of the legislative change. As noted in the majority opinion, the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. People v. MunozAppellate Court of Illinois · 1974
  2. People v. LieblingAppellate Court of Illinois · 1976
  3. The People v. AndersonIllinois Supreme Court · 1930
  4. Diercks v. Village of AlgonquinIllinois Supreme Court · 1961

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

Powered by the Exa API