Jane Miller Brennan's Legal Cases (4)

Appeals

People v. McEwen 157 Ill.App.3d 222, 510 N.E.2d 74 (1st Dist., 1987

Jul 21, 1987

OUTCOME: Affirmed and remanded

Appeared and argued on behalf of the State: "(1) exclusion of prospective jurors from guilt phase of trial based on their expressed death penalty scruples was not error; (2) sentencing scheme did not v ... iolate defendant's due process rights; (3) defendant was not denied effective assistance of counsel; (4) defendant was guilty of felony-murder even if shooting was accidental; and (5) State's peremptory challenges excluding first three black potential jurors required Batson hearing."

Appeals

Walker v. Hardiman 116 Ill.2d 413, 507 N.E.2d 849 (1987)

Jun 05, 1987

OUTCOME: Affirmed

Appeared and argued on behalf of the State: "Habeas Corpus Petition: failure of state to follow its alleged usual practice of notifying defendants when they were to surrender did not entitle defendants ... to discharge on ground of unreasonable delay, where the Appellate Court mandate was spread on the record in the circuit court within reasonable time after denial of petitions for leave to appeal."

Appeals

People v. Gibson 156 Ill.App.3d 459, 509 N.E.2d 563 (1st Dist., 1987)

May 21, 1987

OUTCOME: Convictions and Sentences reinstated

Appeared and argued on behalf of the State: "Presumptive unreliability of co-defendants' admissions was rebutted by defendant's own confession, and testimony of victim and her son, which were sufficien ... t to affirm defendant's convictions, so that violation of Bruton rule did not require reversal."

Appeals

People v. Tackett 150 Ill.App.3d 406, 501 N.E.2d 891 (1st Dist., 1986)

Jan 06, 1987

OUTCOME: Affirmed and remanded with directions.

Appeared and argued on behalf of the State: "The Appellate Court, Stamos, J., held that: (1) evidence was sufficient to establish that defendant's blows caused injury to victim's brain and that such in ... jury was cause of death; (2) defendant's right to counsel was not violated; and (3) there was sufficient circumstantial evidence to infer that defendant knew or had reason to know that victim was present when they entered home for purposes of conviction of home invasion."

Transform legal challenges into solutions.

Connect now to review your situation.

The Avvo Rating explained

The Avvo Rating explained