Legal Opinion · Dissent

People v. Allen

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided August 26, 1992No. 3—91—0213Published

1DissentJustice Stouder

I disagree with the result reached by my colleagues. I believe the defendant is entitled to a new trial. In particular, I believe the trial court committed reversible error when it granted the motion in limine, thereby excluding testimony regarding the conversation which took place four months before the occurrence involved in this case.

The majority of the court has properly declared the applicable rules and standard of review. My disagreement is with the application of such rules to the facts of this case.

People v. Rogers (1985), 135 Ill. App. 3d 608, 482 N.E.2d 639, cited by the majority,…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. People v. IllgenIllinois Supreme Court · 1991
  2. People v. GardnerAppellate Court of Illinois · 1977
  3. People v. CrosserAppellate Court of Illinois · 1983
  4. People v. RogersAppellate Court of Illinois · 1985
  5. State v. GibsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1982

2 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