Legal Opinion

People v. Mark P.

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided June 11, 2010No. 2-09-0294PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice McLAREN

After an involuntary commitment hearing, the trial court found that respondent, Mark E, was a person subject to involuntary admission. Respondent appeals from this finding and requests reversal of the order, arguing that he was denied a fair trial because: (1) he was handcuffed “without any inquiry as to whether handcuffs were warranted”; (2) defense counsel was ineffective for failing to properly raise the issue of restraining him; and (3) even though the commitment order has expired, this issue falls within the public interest exception to the mootness doctrine. We affirm the judgment of…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. People v. Alfred H.H.Illinois Supreme Court · 2009
  3. People v. BooseIllinois Supreme Court · 1977
  4. People v. AllenIllinois Supreme Court · 2006
  5. People v. UrdialesIllinois Supreme Court · 2007

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. In re Benny M.Illinois Supreme Court · 2018
  2. ESTATE OF OGLESBY v. BergAppellate Court of Illinois · 2011
  3. People v. KelleyAppellate Court of Illinois · 2013
  4. People v. Benny M. (In Re Benny M.)Illinois Supreme Court · 2017
  5. Nesvig v. HoffNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2013

8 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