People v. Young
Appellate Court of Illinois
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Drucker
Defendant was convicted after a jury trial of the offense of armed robbery. Judgment was entered and he was sentenced to twelve to twenty years. On appeal defendant contends that his armed robbery confession and his in-court identification should have been suppressed.
The defendant does not challenge the sufficiency of the evidence. The facts may be briefly summarized. On November 30, 1966, Rita Kooistra was at the office of her employer when a man, whom she identified in court as the defendant, entered and inquired about a loan. The man then pointed a gun at her and requested the money in the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Simmons v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Ronald Dale Windsor v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1968
- David Matthew Lathers v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1968
- The PEOPLE v. McMathIllinois Supreme Court · 1970
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Commonwealth v. MarabelSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
- People v. Van PeltAppellate Court of Illinois · 1974
- People v. PerryAppellate Court of Illinois · 1976
- People v. GunnAppellate Court of Illinois · 1973
- Commonwealth v. MarabelSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.