use of force defense (Illinois) · Go Syfert
← Illinois issues

use of force defense in Illinois

26 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 1969–2026 8 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Illinois courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (7)

CaseFollowedCited
People v. Morgangreen
ill · 1999 · cited in 5 Illinois opinions naming this issue, 2021–2026
2 sentences

2026To raise a claim of self-defense, a defendant must present evidence supporting each of the following elements that justify the use of force in defense of a person: “(1) that force had been threatened against [the] defendant; (2) that [the] defendant was not the aggressor; (3) that the danger of harm was imminent; (4) that the force threatened was unlawful; (5) that [the] defendant actually believed that a danger existed, that the use of force was necessary to avert the danger, and that the kind and amount of force actually used was necessary; and (6) that [the] defendant’s beliefs were reasona

2022However, he is 5 No. 1-16-0892 justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or another, or the commission of a forcible felony.” 720 ILCS 5/7-1(a) (West 2012). ¶ 19 Our supreme court explained the burdens of proof: “[T]o raise a claim of self-defense, a defendant must present evidence supporting each of the following elements which justify the use of force in defense of a person: (1) that force had been threatened against defenda

55
People v. Ellisgreen
illappct · 1982 · cited in 5 Illinois opinions naming this issue, 1991–2024
2 sentences

2024This same lack of reasonableness that defeated the defendant’s self-defense theory would have likewise defeated a defense-of-dwelling defense. ¶ 58 Additionally, “[i]n order to justify the use of force in defense of dwelling, the entry into the dwelling must be unlawful or there must be an attack upon a dwelling.” People v. Ellis, 107 Ill.

2021In short, “[i]n order to justify the use of force in defense of dwelling, the entry into the dwelling must be unlawful or there must be an attack upon a dwelling.” (Emphasis added.) People v. Ellis, 107 Ill.

45
People v. Leegreen
ill · 2004 · cited in 4 Illinois opinions naming this issue, 2021–2022
2 sentences

2022However, he is 5 No. 1-16-0892 justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or another, or the commission of a forcible felony.” 720 ILCS 5/7-1(a) (West 2012). ¶ 19 Our supreme court explained the burdens of proof: “[T]o raise a claim of self-defense, a defendant must present evidence supporting each of the following elements which justify the use of force in defense of a person: (1) that force had been threatened against defenda

2022However, he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or 5 No. 1-16-0800 great bodily harm to himself or another, or the commission of a forcible felony.” 720 ILCS 5/7-1(a) (West 2012). ¶ 20 Our supreme court explained the burdens of proof: “[T]o raise a claim of self-defense, a defendant must present evidence supporting each of the following elements which justify the use of force in defense of a person: (1) that force had been threatened against defenda

44
People v. Jeffriesgreen
ill · 1995 · cited in 2 Illinois opinions naming this issue, 1999–1999
2 sentences

1999See People v. Jeffries, 164 Ill.2d 104, 127-28 , 207 Ill.Dec. 21 , 646 N.E.2d 587 (1995).

1999See People v. Jeffries, 164 Ill. 2d 104, 127-28 (1995).

22
People v. Chapmangreen
illappct · 1977 · cited in 2 Illinois opinions naming this issue, 1982–2024
2 sentences

2024App. 3d 603, 613 (1982) (citing People v. Chapman, 49 Ill.

1982(People v. Chapman (1977), 49 Ill.

12
People v. Parkergreen
ill · 2006 · cited in 1 Illinois opinions naming this issue, 2024–2024
1 sentence

2024“The issue of whether the jury instructions accurately conveyed to the jury the applicable law is reviewed de novo.” People v. Parker, 223 Ill. 2d 494, 501 (2006) (citing People v. Herron, 215 Ill. 2d 167, 174 (2005)).

11
People v. Herrongreen
ill · 2005 · cited in 1 Illinois opinions naming this issue, 2024–2024
1 sentence

2024“The issue of whether the jury instructions accurately conveyed to the jury the applicable law is reviewed de novo.” People v. Parker, 223 Ill. 2d 494, 501 (2006) (citing People v. Herron, 215 Ill. 2d 167, 174 (2005)).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (10)

CaseCitedYears
People v. Balfour green
illappct · 1986
2 sentences

1994(People v. Balfour (1986), 148 Ill.

1993(People v. Balfour (1986), 148 Ill.

41987–1994
People v. Williams green
illappct · 1965
2 sentences

1989In order to justify the use of force in defense of a person, defendant must satisfy the six elements set forth in People v. Williams (1965), 56 Ill.

1969Defendant cites People v. Williams, 56 Ill App2d 159, 205 NE2d 749 (1965), where it is said (p 165): “ [I] t is settled law that the burden of proof never shifts to the defendant, no matter what his offense may be, and where he pleads self-defense, it is sufficient to acquit him, if his evidence on self-defense, together with all other evidence in the case, creates a reasonable doubt of his guilt.” As to the use of force in defense of person, it is said in chapter 38, section 7-1: “A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that

31969–1989
People v. Stokes green
illappct · 1989
2 sentences

1994Furthermore, the use of deadly force is limited to those situations in which (a) the threatened force will cause death or great bodily harm or (b) the force threatened is a forcible felony.” People v. Stokes (1989), 185 Ill.

1991Furthermore, the use of deadly force is limited to those situations in which (a) the threatened force will cause death or great bodily harm or (b) the force threatened is a forcible felony.” (Stokes, 185 Ill.

21991–1994
People v. Jackson green
ill · 2009
1 sentence

2024Id. at 281 . ¶ 42 Our statute that authorizes the use of force in defense of a person states: “A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or another against such other’s imminent use of unlawful force.

12024–2024
People v. Mohr green
ill · 2008
1 sentence

2024We again agree with the defendant. - 23 - No. 1-22-1555 ¶ 49 “There must be some evidence in the record to justify an instruction, and it is within the trial court's discretion to determine which issues are raised by the evidence and whether an instruction should be given.” Mohr, 228 Ill. 2d at 65 .

12024–2024
People v. Collins green
ill · 1985
2 sentences

1991Furthermore, the use of deadly force is limited to those situations in which (a) the threatened force will cause death or great bodily harm or (b) the force threatened is a forcible felony." ( Stokes, 185 Ill.App.3d at 655-56 , 133 Ill.Dec. at 699 , 541 N.E.2d at 1137 .) We agree with the above analysis and further hold that when the trier of fact has rejected a defendant's claim of self-defense, the standard of review regarding whether the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant was not acting in self-defense is the same standard applicable to any other element: The relevant que

1991Furthermore, the use of deadly force is limited to those situations in which (a) the threatened force will cause death or great bodily harm or (b) the force threatened is a forcible felony." ( Stokes, 185 Ill.App.3d at 655-56 , 133 Ill.Dec. at 699 , 541 N.E.2d at 1137 .) We agree with the above analysis and further hold that when the trier of fact has rejected a defendant's claim of self-defense, the standard of review regarding whether the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant was not acting in self-defense is the same standard applicable to any other element: The relevant que

11991–1991
People v. Greene green
illappct · 1987
1 sentence

1988App. 3d 215, 221 .) The use of force in defense of one’s person is justified where: “(1) that force is threatened against the person; (2) the person threatened is not the aggressor; (3) the danger of harm is imminent; (4) the force threatened is unlawful; and (5) the person threatened must actually believe that a danger exists, that the use of force is necessary and that such beliefs are reasonable. [Citations.]” People v. Greene (1987), 160 Ill.

11988–1988
People v. Williams green
illappct · 1981
1 sentence

1982App. 3d 8, 17 , 420 N.E.2d 710 .) In order to justify the use of force in defense of dwelling, the entry into the dwelling must be unlawful or there must be an attack upon a dwelling.

11982–1982
People v. Donaldson green
ill · 1982
2 sentences

1982Subsequent to the argument of this case we decided People v. Donaldson (1982), 91 Ill.2d 164 .

1982Subsequent to the argument of this case we decided People v. Donaldson (1982), 91 Ill. 2d 164 .

11982–1982
People v. Allen green
ill · 1972
2 sentences

1975The instruction is that on the use of force in defense of a person. • 1 It is proper to give the self-defense instruction only if the issue of self-defense is raised by the evidence. ( People v. Allen, 50 Ill.2d 280 , 278 N.E.2d 762 .) The trial judge refused to give this instruction on the grounds that the evidence did not raise the issue.

1975The instruction is that on the use of force in defense of a person. • 1 It is proper to give the self-defense instruction only if the issue of self-defense is raised by the evidence. ( People v. Allen, 50 Ill.2d 280 , 278 N.E.2d 762 .) The trial judge refused to give this instruction on the grounds that the evidence did not raise the issue.

11975–1975

Statutes the citing opinions construe

IL § 720 ILCS 5/9-2 (5) IL § 720 ILCS 5/2-8 (4) IL § 720 ILCS 5/7-1 (4)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

IL 26 (1969–2026) GA 22 (2003–2023) MA 6 (1992–2024) CA 4 (1971–2016) TX 4 (2005–2025) HI 4 (2002–2025) MT 3 (1994–2025) KS 3 (1988–2026) CT 3 (1997–2024) FL 3 (2007–2015) MO 2 (1984–2007) DC 2 (1984–2013)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check