propriety of giving instruction in Illinois

1935It likewise differs from People v. Schladweiler, 315 Ill. 553 , in that it is couched in different language, and there was no question in that case as to the propriety of giving an instruction on the question of alibi.

1927It likewise differs from People v. Schladweiler, 315 Ill. 553 , in that it is couched in different language, and there was no question in that case as to the propriety of giving an instruction on the question of alibi.

1982(Illinois Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal, No. 13.21 (2d ed. 1968).) In his reply brief, defendant withdrew that portion of his argument which dealt with the propriety of giving this instruction in light of the Illinois Supreme Court’s decision in People v. Housby (1981), 84 Ill. 2d 415 , 420 N.E.2d 151 .

1982(Illinois Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal, No. 13.21 (2d ed. 1968).) In his reply brief, defendant withdrew that portion of his argument which dealt with the propriety of giving this instruction in light of the Illinois Supreme Court’s decision in People v. Housby (1981), 84 Ill. 2d 415 , 420 N.E.2d 151 .

1972(See People v. Brown, 415 Ill. 23 , 112 N.E.2d 122 .) It was held in People v. Beil, 322 Ill. 434, 440 , 153 N.E. 639 that “Where the record contains evidence upon which a verdict of manslaughter may be returned, the fact that the evidence would have justified the jury in finding tlie defendant guilty of murder is not a matter of which he can complain.” (See also People v. White, 311 Ill. 356 , 143 N.E. 108 ; People v. Taylor, 36 Ill.2d 483, 489 , 224 N.E.2d 266 .) No case has been cited which involves the application of the rule in the precise context present here.

1972(See People v. Brown, 415 Ill. 23 , 112 N.E.2d 122 .) It was held in People v. Beil, 322 Ill. 434, 440 , 153 N.E. 639 that “Where the record contains evidence upon which a verdict of manslaughter may be returned, the fact that the evidence would have justified the jury in finding tlie defendant guilty of murder is not a matter of which he can complain.” (See also People v. White, 311 Ill. 356 , 143 N.E. 108 ; People v. Taylor, 36 Ill.2d 483, 489 , 224 N.E.2d 266 .) No case has been cited which involves the application of the rule in the precise context present here.

1972(See People v. Brown, 415 Ill. 23 , 112 N.E.2d 122 .) It was held in People v. Beil, 322 Ill. 434, 440 , 153 N.E. 639 that “Where the record contains evidence upon which a verdict of manslaughter may be returned, the fact that the evidence would have justified the jury in finding tlie defendant guilty of murder is not a matter of which he can complain.” (See also People v. White, 311 Ill. 356 , 143 N.E. 108 ; People v. Taylor, 36 Ill.2d 483, 489 , 224 N.E.2d 266 .) No case has been cited which involves the application of the rule in the precise context present here.

1972(See People v. Brown, 415 Ill. 23 , 112 N.E.2d 122 .) It was held in People v. Beil, 322 Ill. 434, 440 , 153 N.E. 639 that “Where the record contains evidence upon which a verdict of manslaughter may be returned, the fact that the evidence would have justified the jury in finding tlie defendant guilty of murder is not a matter of which he can complain.” (See also People v. White, 311 Ill. 356 , 143 N.E. 108 ; People v. Taylor, 36 Ill.2d 483, 489 , 224 N.E.2d 266 .) No case has been cited which involves the application of the rule in the precise context present here.

1972(See People v. Brown, 415 Ill. 23 , 112 N.E.2d 122 .) It was held in People v. Beil, 322 Ill. 434, 440 , 153 N.E. 639 that “Where the record contains evidence upon which a verdict of manslaughter may be returned, the fact that the evidence would have justified the jury in finding tlie defendant guilty of murder is not a matter of which he can complain.” (See also People v. White, 311 Ill. 356 , 143 N.E. 108 ; People v. Taylor, 36 Ill.2d 483, 489 , 224 N.E.2d 266 .) No case has been cited which involves the application of the rule in the precise context present here.

1972(See People v. Brown, 415 Ill. 23 , 112 N.E.2d 122 .) It was held in People v. Beil, 322 Ill. 434, 440 , 153 N.E. 639 that “Where the record contains evidence upon which a verdict of manslaughter may be returned, the fact that the evidence would have justified the jury in finding tlie defendant guilty of murder is not a matter of which he can complain.” (See also People v. White, 311 Ill. 356 , 143 N.E. 108 ; People v. Taylor, 36 Ill.2d 483, 489 , 224 N.E.2d 266 .) No case has been cited which involves the application of the rule in the precise context present here.

1972(See People v. Brown, 415 Ill. 23 , 112 N.E.2d 122 .) It was held in People v. Beil, 322 Ill. 434, 440 , 153 N.E. 639 that “Where the record contains evidence upon which a verdict of manslaughter may be returned, the fact that the evidence would have justified the jury in finding tlie defendant guilty of murder is not a matter of which he can complain.” (See also People v. White, 311 Ill. 356 , 143 N.E. 108 ; People v. Taylor, 36 Ill.2d 483, 489 , 224 N.E.2d 266 .) No case has been cited which involves the application of the rule in the precise context present here.

1972(See People v. Brown, 415 Ill. 23 , 112 N.E.2d 122 .) It was held in People v. Beil, 322 Ill. 434, 440 , 153 N.E. 639 that “Where the record contains evidence upon which a verdict of manslaughter may be returned, the fact that the evidence would have justified the jury in finding tlie defendant guilty of murder is not a matter of which he can complain.” (See also People v. White, 311 Ill. 356 , 143 N.E. 108 ; People v. Taylor, 36 Ill.2d 483, 489 , 224 N.E.2d 266 .) No case has been cited which involves the application of the rule in the precise context present here.

1963(People v. Minor, 20 Ill.2d 496 ; Ill.

1902(McCoy v. People, 175 Ill. 224 ; Gilman v. People, 178 id. 19; Little v. People, 157 id. 153; Lilly v. People, 148 id. 467).