People v. Mark P.
Appellate Court of Illinois
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
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- People v. Alfred H.H.Illinois Supreme Court · 2009
- People v. BooseIllinois Supreme Court · 1977
- People v. AllenIllinois Supreme Court · 2006
- People v. UrdialesIllinois Supreme Court · 2007
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- In re Benny M.Illinois Supreme Court · 2018
- ESTATE OF OGLESBY v. BergAppellate Court of Illinois · 2011
- People v. KelleyAppellate Court of Illinois · 2013
- People v. Benny M. (In Re Benny M.)Illinois Supreme Court · 2017
- Nesvig v. HoffNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2013
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.