Legal Opinion · Dissent

People v. Denzel W.

Illinois Supreme Court

Decided March 18, 2010No. 107003, 107112Published

1DissentJustice Freeman

This case presents the simple issue of what happens when Rule 711 is violated due to the failure to obtain the required written consent of the person on whose behalf the law student was acting. Resolving this issue requires that we interpret our own rules. In so doing, the court once again harrumphs the familiar edict that its rules “are not mere suggestions” and that “[i]ndeed, they have the force of law.” 237 Ill. 2d at 294; see also People v. Glasper, 234 Ill. 2d 173, 189 (2009) (addressing what happens when a trial judge does not permit voir dire questioning as required under Rule 431).…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  4. Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  5. Holloway v. ArkansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1978

14 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