The People v. O'Leary

3 Citing cases

  1. People v. Brown

    2024 Ill. App. 230317 (Ill. App. Ct. 2024)

    As we explained above, however, that decision has been vacated. It carries no precedential value (Mohanty v. St. John's Heart Clinic, 22 Ill.2d 52, (2006); People v. Erwin, 2023 IL App (1st) 200936, ΒΆ 16), and it is of no effect (see also United States v. Ellis, 419 F.3d 1189, 1192 (11th Cir. 2005) ("vacated opinions are officially gone. They have no legal effect whatever.

  2. People v. Watrous

    350 N.E.2d 494 (Ill. App. Ct. 1976)

    The fact that the circumstantial evidence relied upon must not give rise to any reasonable hypothesis under which the defendant could be innocent of the crime charged, does not mean that the trier of fact is "required to search out a series of potential explanations compatible with innocence, and elevate them to the status of a reasonable doubt." People v. Huff (1963) 29 Ill.2d 315, 320; People v. O'Leary (1961) 22 Ill.2d 52, 56; People v. Russell (1959) 17 Ill.2d 328, 331. The victim met the defendant and his two companions at a bar in Beloit, Wisconsin, and the victim asked defendant to drive him to his home, also in Beloit.

  3. People v. Davis

    315 N.E.2d 79 (Ill. App. Ct. 1974)   Cited 7 times
    In People v. Davis, 21 Ill. App.3d 177, 179, following an armed robbery in a tavern and on the basis of a description given by a tavern patron, a flash message was sent out by police headquarters to all police units in the area giving a description of the robbers and that they were "`riding in a 1961, possibly a 1961 to 1964 Ford station wagon white in color.'"

    Moreover, even if there had been no identifications of defendant and his co-defendants, the circumstances of the arrest and the recovery of physical evidence linking them to the crimes were sufficient evidence to support the conviction. (See People v. O'Leary, 22 Ill.2d 52, 174 N.E.2d 191.) Accordingly, we also reject defendant's argument that he was not proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.