What did the Illinois Supreme Court ultimately hold in Docket No. 93952, People v. Alexander (2003), and where is the full opinion published?

1. The legal question that landed on the Illinois Supreme Court’s desk

The core legal issue recorded in the sources was whether Illinois’s statute prohibiting child pornography — specifically subsections 11‑20.1(a) and (a) — was facially overbroad or otherwise unconstitutional because it arguably criminalized possession of computer‑generated or “virtual” images that did not involve real children, a problem the U.S. Supreme Court addressed in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition ^{[1] [3]}. The trial court explicitly found the state statute similar to the federal law struck down in Ashcroft and granted the defendant’s motion on May 15, 2002 ^{[1] [2]}.

2. Where the opinion and related materials are published

The full text of the Illinois Supreme Court’s opinion in People v. Alexander is publicly accessible online: the case appears on FindLaw’s Illinois Supreme Court opinions page and on Justia’s case law repository ^{[3] [2]}, and the Illinois Courts website hosts the docket entry and related materials for Docket No. 93952 ^[1]. Those sources together serve as the primary distribution points for the opinion and docket materials referenced in the reporting ^{[3] [2] [1]}.

3. What the trial‑level record and contemporaneous reporting establish

Contemporaneous snippets and trial‑court excerpts repeatedly record that the defendant had entered a guilty plea, later withdrew it after Ashcroft, and moved to dismiss on constitutional grounds; the trial court agreed that the Illinois statute contained the constitutionally problematic language that could reach purely computer‑generated images and thus granted his motion ^{[3] [1] [2]}. Multiple public sites that host the case file highlight the trial court’s May 15, 2002 ruling and the resulting appeal to the Illinois Supreme Court ^{[1] [2]}.

4. What the provided sources do not conclusively show

The documents in the search results faithfully report the procedural posture, the trial court’s ruling, and that the Illinois Supreme Court filed the case in May 2003, but the extracts provided here do not include a clear, standalone paragraph summarizing the Illinois Supreme Court’s ultimate holding on the constitutional question ^{[1] [3] [2]}. While repository entries and secondary pages (for example, a community wiki) list the case citation and summarize outcomes, the snippets supplied do not on their own permit an authoritative sentence stating exactly how the Illinois Supreme Court resolved the statutory‑validity question without consulting the full opinion text ^{[4] [3]}.

5. How to get the definitive holding and the official citation

To read the court’s holding verbatim and obtain the official reporter citation, consult the full opinion hosted at FindLaw and Justia (both cited in the search results) and the Illinois Courts docket page for Docket No. 93952, which contains the filed opinion and related filings ^{[3] [2] [1]}. The publicly available case entry commonly cited for this matter is People v. Alexander, 204 Ill. 2d 472, 791 N.E.2d 506 according to public summaries that accompany the full text links ^{[4] [3]}; confirmation should be obtained by opening the opinion at the links above ^{[3] [2]}.

6. Competing narratives and why the record matters

Some summaries and secondary sites emphasize that the state statute was vulnerable for the same reasons the federal statute was in Ashcroft — overbreadth with respect to virtual images — while other court documents reflect prosecutorial and appellate arguments defending the statute and the conviction ^{[1] [3]}. The available docket and opinion sources are the antidote to conflicting summaries: read the FindLaw/Justia full opinion and the Illinois Courts docket entry to see the court’s reasoning, the votes, and any narrowing or severance the court applied ^{[3] [2] [1]}.