Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Illinois law gave every person convicted in a criminal trial a right of review by writ of error, but it was necessary for the defendant to furnish the appellate court with a bill of exceptions or report of proceedings at the trial certified by the trial judge, and it was sometimes impossible to prepare such documents without a stenographic ...
The Supreme Court of Virginia has stated that '"This Court has repeatedly held that the effect of an appeal to circuit court is to "annul the judgment of the inferior tribunal as completely as if there had been no previous trial."' [14] The only exception to this is that if a defendant appeals a conviction for a crime having multiple levels of ...
A vacated judgment is usually the result of the judgment of an appellate court, which overturns, reverses, or sets aside the judgment of a lower court. An appellate court may also vacate its own decisions. Rules of procedure may allow vacatur either at the request of a party (a motion to vacate) or sua sponte (at the court's initiative). [1]
Illinois Reports is the official reporter of the Illinois Supreme Court and the Illinois Appellate Courts. It is published by Thomson Reuters , under contract with the Illinois Supreme Court Reporter of Decisions .
Case opinions Unanimous opinion by Stamos In re Himmel , 125 Ill.2d 531, 533 N.E.2d 790 (Ill. 1988), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of Illinois that upheld the suspension of an attorney's license for failing to report misconduct by another attorney.
A federal court may also remand when a civil case is filed in a state court and the defendant removes the case to the local federal district court. If the federal court decides that the case was not one in which removal was permissible, it may remand the case to state court.
A judicial opinion is a form of legal opinion written by a judge or a judicial panel in the course of resolving a legal dispute, providing the decision reached to resolve the dispute, and usually indicating the facts which led to the dispute and an analysis of the law used to arrive at the decision.
Illinois. Justice John Paul Stevens wrote the opinion, which affirmed the decision of the Illinois Appellate Court, and upheld Taylor's conviction. He began by addressing the position of the state of Illinois, who argued that there is never a Compulsory Process Clause concern when preclusion of a witness is used as a discovery sanction. [20]