Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

People v. Humphrey

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided October 21, 1980No. 80-4Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice Stouder

Jury deliberations in the case at bar began at 2:50 p.m. on October 25, 1979. Slightly more than one hour later the jurors asked the following questions of the trial judge:

“Is there a legal reason why Howard could not testify in this trial?

Are transcripts available?”

To the first of these questions the trial judge responded that there was a legal reason why Howard did not testify. In response to the second question, the trial judge merely said “No.” Both of these answers were given outside the presence of and without consultation with the defendants, their counsel, or the prosecuting attorney.

T…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Illinois v. AllenSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  2. People v. PrecupIllinois Supreme Court · 1978
  3. People v. QueenIllinois Supreme Court · 1974
  4. People v. PierceIllinois Supreme Court · 1974
  5. The PEOPLE v. NobleIllinois Supreme Court · 1969

12 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