# People v. Hill

> Appellate Court of Illinois · June 17, 1998 · 297 Ill. App. 3d 500

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9520327

## Case

- **Full name:** The PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MICHAEL HILL, Defendant-Appellant
- **Court:** Appellate Court of Illinois
- **Decided:** June 17, 1998
- **Citations:** 297 Ill. App. 3d 500; 231 Ill. Dec. 762; 697 N.E.2d 316; 1998 Ill. App. LEXIS 384
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Cahill
- **Judges:** Gordon, Cahill
- **Cited by:** 20 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9520327

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- noting the changes in statutory language

## Opinion text

JUSTICE CAHILL concurring:
The majority analysis of the supreme court cases that have dealt with this issue is faultless. I write separately only to point out that the issue of the retroactive application of section 6 — 2(e) (720 ILCS 5/6— 2(e) (West Supp. 1995)) had not been addressed, other than in footnotes, until the second supreme court opinion in Kinkead, 182 Ill. 2d at 333, 335.1 agree with the footnote in our opinion that the special concurrence in the second Kinkead opinion “implicitly agreed with the plurality that the amended version of the statute should not be given retroactive effect.” 297 Ill. App. 3d at 516-17 n.6. Yet the second Kinkead opinion does not squarely address the discussion of rules of procedure, including rebuttable presumptions, that appear in First National Bank v. King, 165 Ill. 2d 533, 542-43 (1995), or the supreme court cases cited therein.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9520327. Public record. Not legal advice.