335 Ill. App. 3d 171 - People v. Walter’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
April 2011
most recently cited
5 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 64 Ill. 2d 264 - Village of Park Forest v. Fagan · 191 Ill. App. 3d 963 - People v. Alfonso
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"Supreme Court Rule 504 governs the setting of a defendant's first appearance date in traffic cases. The rule provides that `[t]he date set by the arresting officer * * * for an accused's first appearance in court shall be not less than 14 days but within 60 days after the date of the arrest whenever practicable.' [Citation.] Rule 504's time limitation is directory, not mandatory. [Citation.] Therefore, if the arresting officer sets a first appearance date outside the period provided by the rule, the trial court is not required to dismiss the charge for lack of jurisdiction. [Citation.] However, the State bears the burden in such situations of establishing that it was impracticable to comply with the rule's time limitation. [Citation.] In determining if it was practicable to set the first appearance date within the prescribed 14-to 60-day period, neither the arresting officer's intent nor prejudice to the defendant is relevant. [Citation.] If the trial court determines that it was not impracticable to set the date within the rule's time limitation, the court's dismissal of charges will not be disturbed on review absent an abuse of discretion. [Citation.] * * * The State's arguments that the officers' errors were unintended and `technical' [citation] and that the limitation period is directory, not mandatory, miss the point. The plain language of the rule provides that the setting of a first appearance date outside the prescribed period of Rule 504 is excusable only upon evide”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. People v. Love“The date set by the arresting officer or the clerk of the circuit court for an accused's first appearance in court shall not be less than 14 days but within 60 days after the date of the arrest, whenever practicable. It is the policy of this court that, if the arresting agency has been exempted from the requirements of Rule 505, an accused who appears and pleads `not guilty' to an alleged traffic or conservation offense punishable by fine only should be granted a trial on the merits on the appearance date or, if the accused demands a trial by jury, within a reasonable time thereafter. A failure to appear on the first appearance date by an arresting officer shall, in and of itself, not normally be considered good cause for a continuance.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. People v. Love
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.