Legal Opinion

People v. Smith

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided September 24, 2004No. 1-03-1143PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice O’Mara Frossard

The issue on appeal involves defendant’s allegation of forensic fraud by serological expert Pamela Fish. Defendant’s successive post-conviction petition alleged: “Petitioner was denied his right to due process of law under the 14th amendment to the United States Constitution and section I, article 2 of the Constitution of the State of Illinois where the State presented the perjured testimony of criminalist Pamela Fish to secure the conviction of the petitioner.” U.S. Const, amend. XIV; Ill. Const. 1970, art. I, § 2. Defendant, in his petition, does not raise a claim of actual innocence;…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. United States v. BagleySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  2. Giglio v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  3. Kyles v. WhitleySupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  4. People v. ColemanIllinois Supreme Court · 1998
  5. People v. EdwardsIllinois Supreme Court · 2001

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. People v. OrtizIllinois Supreme Court · 2009
  2. People v. OrtizIllinois Supreme Court · 2009
  3. People v. AndersonAppellate Court of Illinois · 2007
  4. People v. MitchellAppellate Court of Illinois · 2012
  5. People v. AndersonAppellate Court of Illinois · 2006

10 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