Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

People v. Duncan

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided May 4, 1994No. 3-92-0883Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice McCUSKEY

I agree with the majority’s conclusion that the defendant’s sentence and two of his convictions should be affirmed. Accordingly, I concur with that portion of the majority’s opinion.

However, based upon my review of the record, I conclude that the defendant’s action in throwing fireworks through the broken window was an "unlawful entry” sufficient to support a second conviction of burglary. As a result, I dissent from that portion of the majority’s opinion which vacates the defendant’s second burglary conviction.

The courts in both Davis and People v. Palmer (1980), 83 Ill. App. 3d 732, 404…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. People v. JohnsonIllinois Supreme Court · 1989
  2. People v. SegaraIllinois Supreme Court · 1988
  3. People v. PalmerAppellate Court of Illinois · 1980
  4. Sears v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 1986
  5. People v. TragniNew York Supreme Court · 1982

4 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