witness testimony that she notified police of an unrelated incident with defendant, which ultimately led to defendant’s identification and arrest, admitted to rebut suggestion that police unjustifiably targeted defendant eight months after the offenses occurred
How later courts described this case
- witness testimony that she notified police of an unrelated incident with defendant, which ultimately led to defendant’s identification and arrest, admitted to rebut suggestion that police unjustifiably targeted defendant eight months after the offenses occurred
- a court may consider whether the defendant has a history of prior delinquency or criminal activity
- “In view of the entire record and the overwhelming evidence of [the] defendant’s guilt, we cannot say that the improper comment either constituted a material factor in defendant’s convictions or otherwise prevented him from receiving a fair trial so as to require reversal.”
- in Illinois “identification of the accused by a single eyewitness is sufficient to sustain a conviction, provided that the witness viewed the accused under circumstances permitting a positive identification”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
JUSTICE SIMON, concurring in part and dissenting in part:
I concur in the majority’s decision to uphold the conviction. However, for the reasons set forth in my separate opinions in People v. Lewis (1981), 88 Ill. 2d 129, 179 (Simon, J., dissenting), in People v. Silagy (1984), 101 Ill. 2d 147, 184 (Simon, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part), and in People v. Albanese (1984), 104 Ill. 2d 504, 549 (Simon, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part), I believe that the Illinois death penalty statute is unconstitutional and that the death sentence in this case should be vacated.