Legal Opinion

People v. Heinz

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided April 27, 1994No. 2-92-1484PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Bowman

Following the denial of his post-sentencing motion after pleading guilty to a burglary, defendant, David Heinz, appeals, contending that it was reversible error for the court to deny his motion to reconsider the sentence where defense counsel failed to file a certificate stating that he had consulted with defendant to ascertain his contentions of error thereby violating Supreme Court Rule 604(d) (145 Ill. 2d R. 604(d)). Defendant further argues that counsel’s failure to examine the transcript of the sentencing hearing prior to the hearing on the motion was also reversible error. We agree that…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. People v. JanesIllinois Supreme Court · 1994
  2. People v. DickersonAppellate Court of Illinois · 1991
  3. People v. DavisAppellate Court of Illinois · 1994

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. People v. WyattAppellate Court of Illinois · 1999
  2. People v. FitzgibbonIllinois Supreme Court · 1998
  3. People of State of Illinois v. ShirleyAppellate Court of Illinois · 1996
  4. People v. MunetsiAppellate Court of Illinois · 1996
  5. People v. Rice Supplemental OpinionAppellate Court of Illinois · 1997

7 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