⚖ SoapBox law
CasesDocketsStatutesRegulationsJudgesLawyersFile a complaintOversightDataLibrary

Cases

Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.

4 opinions for “Clark G Angarano”

People v. Bankspublic domain
Illinois Supreme Court · 1987-11-23 · Published · cited 68× · 520 N.E.2d 617; 121 Ill. 2d 36; 117 Ill. Dec. 266; 1987 Ill. LEXIS 281
121 Ill.2d 36 (1987) 520 N.E.2d 617 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Appellee, v. RAYMOND BANKS, Appellant. — THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Appellee, v. BOOKER T. BLAKES, Appellant. — THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Appellant, v. RICHARD DuQUAINE, Appellee. Nos. 62815, 63179, 63352. Supreme Court of Illinois. Opinion filed
District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1981-05-21 · Published · cited 54× · 431 A.2d 552; 1981 D.C. App. LEXIS 294
431 A.2d 552 (1981) Robert JENNINGS, Jr., Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Appellee. Ronald JENNINGS, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Appellee. Andre R. SPRINGS, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Appellee. Nos. 14122, 14241 and 14130. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Argued February 20, 1980. Decided May 21, 1981.
District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1978-10-16 · Published · cited 35× · 392 A.2d 1015; 1978 D.C. App. LEXIS 327
392 A.2d 1015 (1978) Gerald EVANS, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Appellee. Wilkin D. LUMPKIN, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Appellee. Nos. 11200, 11249. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Argued March 8, 1978. Decided October 16, 1978. *1017 William R. Herman, Public Defender Service, Washington, D.
District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1978-11-16 · Published · cited 21× · 395 A.2d 796; 1978 D.C. App. LEXIS 369
GALLAGHER, Associate Judge: Following a jury trial, appellants Brenda Glass and Louis Davis were convicted of armed robbery (D.C.Code 1973, §§ 22-3202, -2901). On appeal, both appellants raise four identical claims of error: (1) they were denied their rights to a speedy trial; and (2) the trial court erred in (a) denying their motions to suppress certain tangible evidence, seized in violation of their Fourth Amendment rights