17 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 2014–2026 9 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
People v. Jeffriesgreen2 sentences2026The Fourth District rejected a holding from the Appellate Court, Third District, in People v. Ammons, 2021 IL App (3d) 150743, ¶ 21 , and similar cases that required a jury instruction on self- defense where a defendant is charged with aggravated battery of a police officer and there is evidence that the officer used excessive force. 2024 IL App (4th) 230401, ¶ 28 . ¶2 Defendant filed a petition for leave to appeal asking us to resolve a conflict between the districts of the appellate court regarding “whether a showing of excessive police force alone is enough to mandate a self-defense jury in 2024To obtain a self-defense jury instruction, a defendant must establish some evidence of six factors: “(1) force is threatened against a person, (2) the person is not the aggressor, (3) the danger of harm was imminent, (4) the threatened force was unlawful, (5) the person actually and subjectively believed a danger existed that required the use of the force applied, and (6) the person's beliefs were objectively reasonable.” People v. Cacini, 2015 IL App (1st) 130135, ¶ 44 (citing People v. Jeffries, 164 Ill. 2d 104, 128 (1995)). | 2 | 2 |
People v. Davisgreen2 sentences2017See Davis, 213 Ill. 2d at 478 . ¶ 26 Our finding that the self-defense instruction was properly given is largely dispositive of defendant’s ineffectiveness argument. 2017See Davis, 213 Ill. 2d at 478 . ¶ 26 Our finding that the self-defense instruction was properly given is largely dispositive of defendant’s ineffectiveness argument. | 2 | 2 |
People v. DiVincenzogreen2 sentences2016See People v. DiVincenzo, 183 Ill. 2d 239, 251 (1998) (noting that whether an involuntary manslaughter instruction is warranted depends on the facts and circumstances of each case). ¶ 47 Although we agree with the State that its evidence did not serve to raise the affirmative defense of self-defense, we reject the State’s argument that the trial court erred by finding - 10 - there was sufficient evidence to support the giving of the self-defense instruction. 2015See People v. DiVincenzo, 183 Ill. 2d 239, 251 (1998) (noting that whether an involuntary manslaughter instruction is warranted depends on the facts and circumstances of each case). ¶ 47 Although we agree with the State that its evidence did not serve to raise the affirmative defense of self-defense, we reject the State’s argument that the trial court erred by finding there was sufficient evidence to support the giving of the self-defense instruction. | 2 | 2 |
People v. Pattersongreen1 sentence2026See Patterson, 2022 IL App (1st) 182542, ¶ 65 . | 1 | 1 |
People v. Fordgreen1 sentence2026See People v. Ford, 2025 IL App (1st) 231679, ¶ 79 (in determining whether counsel’s decision reflected sound trial strategy, we take the record as our guide). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Hodgesgreen1 sentence2025Defendant asserts that had he been allowed to present this testimony, it would have justified a self-defense jury instruction based on the commission of a forcible felony, which could have arguably led to a different outcome at trial. -5- 2025 IL App (2d) 240068-U ¶ 16 The Act allows a defendant to collaterally attack his conviction if it resulted from a substantial denial of his constitutional rights. 725 ILCS 5/122-1 (West 2022); People v. Hodges, 234 Ill. 2d 1, 9 (2009). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Eastergreen2 sentences2025For example, in People v. Easter, 102 Ill. 2025Id. at 983 . | 1 | 1 |
People v. Chamnessgreen1 sentence2025See People v. Chamness, 129 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Cacinigreen1 sentence2024To obtain a self-defense jury instruction, a defendant must establish some evidence of six factors: “(1) force is threatened against a person, (2) the person is not the aggressor, (3) the danger of harm was imminent, (4) the threatened force was unlawful, (5) the person actually and subjectively believed a danger existed that required the use of the force applied, and (6) the person's beliefs were objectively reasonable.” People v. Cacini, 2015 IL App (1st) 130135, ¶ 44 (citing People v. Jeffries, 164 Ill. 2d 104, 128 (1995)). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Washington
green
2 sentences2026People v. Washington, 2012 IL 110283, ¶ 19 . - 10 - ¶ 26 In this case, we need not determine whether defense counsel’s decision to forgo requesting a defense of a person jury instruction was deficient because the evidence shows there is no reasonable probability the result would have been different if he had done so. 2024People v. Washington, 2012 IL 110283, ¶ 43 . | 2 | 2024–2026 |
People v. Lewis
green
2 sentences2024People v. Lewis, 2015 IL App (1st) 122411 , ¶ 56, 28 N.E.3d 923 . 2024People v. Lewis, 2015 IL App (1st) 122411 , ¶ 56, 28 N.E.3d 923 . | 2 | 2022–2024 |
People v. Smith
green
2 sentences2015This court noted “[t]he defense of self-defense presupposes that the accused committed the act and invokes the defense as a justification.” Id. at 182 (citing People v. Smith, 254 Ill. 167 (1912)). 2015This court noted "[t]he defense of self-defense presupposes that the accused committed the act and invokes the defense as a justification." Id. at 182 (citing People v. Smith, 254 Ill. 167 (1912)). | 2 | 2015–2015 |
People v. Hawkins
green
2 sentences2015This court noted “[t]he defense of self-defense presupposes that the accused committed the act and invokes the defense as a justification.” Id. at 182 (citing People v. Smith, 254 Ill. 167 (1912)). 2015This court noted "[t]he defense of self-defense presupposes that the accused committed the act and invokes the defense as a justification." Id. at 182 (citing People v. Smith, 254 Ill. 167 (1912)). | 2 | 2015–2015 |
People v. Vesey
green
2 sentences2026The Fourth District rejected a holding from the Appellate Court, Third District, in People v. Ammons, 2021 IL App (3d) 150743, ¶ 21 , and similar cases that required a jury instruction on self- defense where a defendant is charged with aggravated battery of a police officer and there is evidence that the officer used excessive force. 2024 IL App (4th) 230401, ¶ 28 . ¶2 Defendant filed a petition for leave to appeal asking us to resolve a conflict between the districts of the appellate court regarding “whether a showing of excessive police force alone is enough to mandate a self-defense jury in 2026See, e.g., IPI Criminal, No. 24-25.12 (used to instruct a jury on a “Peace Officer’s Use Of Force In Making Arrest”); IPI Criminal, No. 24-25.20 (used to instruct a jury on a “Private Person’s Use Of Force In Resisting Arrest”). ¶ 48 The first step of the Fourth District’s two-step inquiry in this case overlooks the evidentiary standard applicable when determining whether the defendant is entitled to receive a self-defense jury instruction. 2024 IL App (4th) 230401, ¶ 28 . | 1 | 2026–2026 |
People v. Ammons
green
1 sentence2026The Fourth District rejected a holding from the Appellate Court, Third District, in People v. Ammons, 2021 IL App (3d) 150743, ¶ 21 , and similar cases that required a jury instruction on self- defense where a defendant is charged with aggravated battery of a police officer and there is evidence that the officer used excessive force. 2024 IL App (4th) 230401, ¶ 28 . ¶2 Defendant filed a petition for leave to appeal asking us to resolve a conflict between the districts of the appellate court regarding “whether a showing of excessive police force alone is enough to mandate a self-defense jury in | 1 | 2026–2026 |
People v. Lee
green
2 sentences2024“The elements of self-defense are: (1) that unlawful force was threatened against a person; (2) that the person threatened was not the aggressor; (3) that the danger of harm was imminent; (4) that the use of force was necessary; (5) that the person threatened actually and subjectively believed a danger existed that required the - 23 - use of the force applied; and (6) the beliefs of the person threatened were objectively reasonable.” Lee, 213 Ill. 2d at 225 , 213 Ill. 2d at 311 . ¶ 71 A criminal defendant is entitled to a self-defense jury instruction where any credible evidence whatsoever sup 2024“The elements of self-defense are: (1) that unlawful force was threatened against a person; (2) that the person threatened was not the aggressor; (3) that the danger of harm was imminent; (4) that the use of force was necessary; (5) that the person threatened actually and subjectively believed a danger existed that required the - 23 - use of the force applied; and (6) the beliefs of the person threatened were objectively reasonable.” Lee, 213 Ill. 2d at 225 , 213 Ill. 2d at 311 . ¶ 71 A criminal defendant is entitled to a self-defense jury instruction where any credible evidence whatsoever sup | 1 | 2024–2024 |
People v. Zehr
green
1 sentence2022ANALYSIS ¶ 48 On appeal, defendant argues that he is entitled to a new trial as to his domestic battery conviction because: 1) Heckinger was ineffective for failing to request a self-defense jury instruction; 2) Heckinger was ineffective for failing to move to sever the violation-of-bail-bond charge from defendant’s remaining charges; and 3) the trial court failed to comply with Zehr, 103 Ill. 2d 472 , while questioning prospective jurors. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
People v. Goods
green
1 sentence2022Goods, 2016 IL App (1st) 140511, ¶ 48 . | 1 | 2022–2022 |
People v. Hopp
green
1 sentence2020Hopp, 209 Ill. 2d at 12 . ¶ 31 The threshold for providing a self-defense jury instruction is a low bar to clear. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
People v. Walker
green
1 sentence2014“Provocation and belief in the need for self-defense can be partial defenses to felony murder, if the provocation or the belief in the need for self-defense occurred before defendant formed the intent to commit the underlying felony.” Id. at 287-88 . ¶ 39 In this case, Maclin argues that there was enough evidence at trial to support a self-defense jury instruction. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
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.
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.