People v. South
Appellate Court of Illinois
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice Webber
I concur with the majority that the sentence imposed is not excessive. I differ sharply on the question of conflict of interest and respectfully dissent on that issue.
The majority’s emphasis on “centralized” versus “decentralized” natures of the public defender’s office is a spurious and nonexistent distinction.
The office of Public Defender is a statutory creation (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 34, par. 5601 et seq.) and the statute is mandatory and plain in its meaning.
Section 1 of “An Act in relation to the office of Public Defender” (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 34, par. 5601) creates the office…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- People v. StingerAppellate Court of Illinois · 1974
- People v. WaltonAppellate Court of Illinois · 1978