give instruction in Illinois

1975The applicable rule is outlined in People v. Gersbacher, 44 Ill.2d 321 , 255 N.E.2d 429 , where the court stated, at pages 325-326: “Although it would have been preferable to instruct the juiy on the elements of the crime attempted, after reviewing the record before us, we find that the evidence presented to the jury regarding the attempted murder was such that no error was occasioned by the failure of the court to give an instruction in this regard.” It is true that in the Gersbacher case, defendant had'tried to strangle his victim and shot her three times in the head leaving her iii a ditch

1975The applicable rule is outlined in People v. Gersbacher, 44 Ill.2d 321 , 255 N.E.2d 429 , where the court stated, at pages 325-326: “Although it would have been preferable to instruct the juiy on the elements of the crime attempted, after reviewing the record before us, we find that the evidence presented to the jury regarding the attempted murder was such that no error was occasioned by the failure of the court to give an instruction in this regard.” It is true that in the Gersbacher case, defendant had'tried to strangle his victim and shot her three times in the head leaving her iii a ditch

2018Although "the trial court considered defendant's youth and mental disorders," the "sentencing scheme * * * did not permit the court to give those factors appropriate weight." Gipson , 2015 IL App (1st) 122451 , ¶ 75, 393 Ill.Dec. 359 , 34 N.E.3d 560 .

2018Although "the trial court considered defendant's youth and mental disorders," the "sentencing scheme * * * did not permit the court to give those factors appropriate weight." Gipson , 2015 IL App (1st) 122451 , ¶ 75, 393 Ill.Dec. 359 , 34 N.E.3d 560 .

2009Hopp, 209 Ill. 2d at 7 , 805 N.E.2d at 1194 .

2009Hopp, 209 Ill. 2d at 7 , 805 N.E.2d at 1194 .

1992App. 3d 173, 175 , 309 N.E.2d 338 .) This court, however, must be “particularly hesitant to require a court to give an instruction on its own motion where it may well have been part of the defense strategy not to have the instruction given.” (People v. Spataro (1978), 67 Ill.

1992App. 3d 69, 74 , 384 N.E.2d 553 .) Likewise, where neither the State nor the defense presents a self-defense instruction, it is not error for the trial court to comply with defendant’s desire not to instruct the jury on self-defense.

1943Co. v. Smith, 226 Ill. 178 .

1931Co. v. Smith, 226 Ill. 178 .

2023We do note the Committee Note for the instruction states: “Give this instruction only when evidence of the victim's prior conviction for a crime of violence has been admitted pursuant to People v. Lynch, 104 Ill.2d 194 , 470 N.E.2d 1018 (1984); IRE 405(b).” (Emphasis in original.) The Committee Note also provides the following guidance: “The Committee devised this instruction to address the nature of evidence regarding a victim's prior conviction for a crime of violence when the defendant claims self-defense.

2023We do note the Committee Note for the instruction states: “Give this instruction only when evidence of the victim's prior conviction for a crime of violence has been admitted pursuant to People v. Lynch, 104 Ill.2d 194 , 470 N.E.2d 1018 (1984); IRE 405(b).” (Emphasis in original.) The Committee Note also provides the following guidance: “The Committee devised this instruction to address the nature of evidence regarding a victim's prior conviction for a crime of violence when the defendant claims self-defense.

1992App. 3d 173, 175 , 309 N.E.2d 338 .) This court, however, must be “particularly hesitant to require a court to give an instruction on its own motion where it may well have been part of the defense strategy not to have the instruction given.” (People v. Spataro (1978), 67 Ill.

1987(In re Estate of Loesch (1985), 134 Ill.

1987App. 3d 123 , 490 N.E.2d 8 .) Evidence sufficient to support the lesser and relatively minor crime must be presented at trial to require a court to give an instruction defining that lesser offense.

1987People v. White (1980), 86 Ill.

1987(Falkenthal v. Public Building Com. (1982), 111 Ill.

1983(People v. Joyner (1972), 50 Ill. 2d 302 , 278 N.E.2d 756 .) However, when such an instruction is not tendered, it is error for the court to give the instruction sua sponte, unless the evidence is closely balanced between murder and voluntary manslaughter.

1983(People v. Joyner (1972), 50 Ill. 2d 302 , 278 N.E.2d 756 .) However, when such an instruction is not tendered, it is error for the court to give the instruction sua sponte, unless the evidence is closely balanced between murder and voluntary manslaughter.

1978(People v. Precup (1978), 73 Ill. 2d 7 , 382 N.E.2d 227 .) In that case the defendant contended that the trial court erred in not directing a mistrial sua sponte and severing the trials of the two defendants.

1978(People v. Precup (1978), 73 Ill. 2d 7 , 382 N.E.2d 227 .) In that case the defendant contended that the trial court erred in not directing a mistrial sua sponte and severing the trials of the two defendants.

1978The defendant, however, did not stand by the motion but proceeded to introduce evidence, which was a waiver and abandonment of the motion and request. [Citations.] The motion and request for an instruction were not renewed at the close of all the evidence, and there is no ruling of the court to be reviewed.” To the same effect is Reavely v. Harris (1909), 239 Ill. 526, 528 , where the court said: “The practice is well settled in this State that in order to preserve the question for review in this court, as a question of law, whether the evidence fairly tends to support the plaintiff’s cause of

1978The defendant, however, did not stand by the motion but proceeded to introduce evidence, which was a waiver and abandonment of the motion and request. [Citations.] The motion and request for an instruction were not renewed at the close of all the evidence, and there is no ruling of the court to be reviewed.” To the same effect is Reavely v. Harris (1909), 239 Ill. 526, 528 , where the court said: “The practice is well settled in this State that in order to preserve the question for review in this court, as a question of law, whether the evidence fairly tends to support the plaintiff’s cause of

1971Defendant admits that his attorneys did not offer such instruction but contends, under the authority of People v. Davis, 74 Ill.App.2d 450 , 221 N.E.2d 63 , that the trial judge was obligated to give the instruction on his own motion.

1971Defendant admits that his attorneys did not offer such instruction but contends, under the authority of People v. Davis, 74 Ill.App.2d 450 , 221 N.E.2d 63 , that the trial judge was obligated to give the instruction on his own motion.

1947(People v. Savant, 301 Ill. 225 ; People v. Lucas, 244 Ill. 603 ; Dunn v. People, 109 Ill. 635 .) Defendant cites People v. Pursley, 302 Ill. 62 , and People v. Papas, 381 Ill. 90 .

1947(People v. Savant, 301 Ill. 225 ; People v. Lucas, 244 Ill. 603 ; Dunn v. People, 109 Ill. 635 .) Defendant cites People v. Pursley, 302 Ill. 62 , and People v. Papas, 381 Ill. 90 .

1947(People v. Savant, 301 Ill. 225 ; People v. Lucas, 244 Ill. 603 ; Dunn v. People, 109 Ill. 635 .) Defendant cites People v. Pursley, 302 Ill. 62 , and People v. Papas, 381 Ill. 90 .

1947(People v. Savant, 301 Ill. 225 ; People v. Lucas, 244 Ill. 603 ; Dunn v. People, 109 Ill. 635 .) Defendant cites People v. Pursley, 302 Ill. 62 , and People v. Papas, 381 Ill. 90 .

1947(People v. Savant, 301 Ill. 225 ; People v. Lucas, 244 Ill. 603 ; Dunn v. People, 109 Ill. 635 .) Defendant cites People v. Pursley, 302 Ill. 62 , and People v. Papas, 381 Ill. 90 .

1938Phelps v. Columbia Phonograph Broadcasting System, Inc., 255 Ill.

1926(People v. Murphy, 276 Ill. 304 .) The error is not, however, of the character which requires a reversal of the judgment.

1923Stoolfire v. Royse, 71 Ill. 223 .

1922In the case of the Illinois Terra Cotta Lumber Co. v. Hanley, 214 Ill. 243 , the court had under consideration an instruction directing a verdict for the plaintiff, but which ignored the defense of assumed risk, and the court held that the giving of such instruction was erroneous.

1910Drury v. Connell, 177 Ill. 43 ; Osgood v. Skinner, 211 id. 229.

1908The case of O’Leary v. People, 88 Ill.

1907The defendant asked the court to give an instruction containing this direction: “And you will return a verdict for the defendant if the evidence is evenly balanced, or if it preponderates in favor of the defendant, or if you are in doubt as to its preponderance.” The court changed it to read, “and you should return a verdict in favor of the defendant if the evidence is evenly balanced, or if it preponderates in favor of the defendant, or if you are unable to determine as to its preponderance.” Counsel say that an instruction containing the exact language changed by the court was approved in No