720 ILCS 5/7-1
Use of force in defense of person
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IL-ILGAilga.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
(720 ILCS 5/7-1)
(from Ch. 38, par. 7-1)
Sec. 7-1. Use of
force in defense of person.
(a) 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. However, 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 great bodily harm
to himself or another, or the commission of a forcible felony. (b) In no case shall any act involving the use of force justified under this Section give rise to any claim or liability brought by or on behalf of any person acting within the definition of "aggressor" set forth in Section 7-4 of this Article, or the estate, spouse, or other family member of such a person, against the person or estate of the person using such justified force, unless the use of force involves willful or wanton misconduct.
(Source: P.A. 93-832, eff. 7-28-04.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 256
cases (132 in the last 5 years), 1993–2026 · leading case: People v. Hodges
People v. Hodges (2009)
“720 ILCS 5/7-1 et seq. (West 2006). These include the right to use deadly force where a person "reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or another.”
People v. McLENNON (2011)
“2d 144 ; see 720 ILCS 5/7-1 (West 2008) ("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.”
People v. Gray (2017)
“720 ILCS 5/7-1 (West 2010) ; accord Lee , 213 Ill.”
People v. Blue (2003)
“First, defendant argues that the trial court erred by refusing to instruct the jury on self-defense pursuant to section 7-1 of the Criminal Code of 1961 (720 ILCS 5/7-1 (West 2000)). Section 7-1 states: "A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the…”
People v. Lee (2004)
“720 ILCS 5/7-1 (West 1998); see also Jeffries, 164 Ill.”
People v. Jackson (1999)
“That instruction is based on section 7-1 of the Criminal Code of 1961 (the Code) (720 ILCS 5/7-1 (West 1994)), which provides that a person is justified in the use of deadly force only if he reasonably believes such force is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible…”
People v. Rutigliano (2020)
“” 720 ILCS 5/7-1(a) (West 2016). See also 720 ILCS 5/7-14 (West 2016) (justifications in article 7 of the Criminal Code of 2012, including self-defense, are affirmative defenses).”
People v. Olaska (2017)
“" 720 ILCS 5/7-1(a) (West 2012). Thus, the elements of a self-defense claim 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)…”
People v. Washington (2012)
“Following the close of evidence and relevant to this appeal, the circuit court instructed the jury on the justifiable use of force in self-defense (720 ILCS 5/7-1 (West 2002)). The court rejected defense counsel’s request to also instruct the jury on second degree murder (720…”
People v. Harmon (2015)
“July 1, 2011)), does not suffice to satisfy section 2-8 to constitute a forcible felony (720 ILCS 5/2-8 (West 2008)) of the type that would justify using deadly force under section 7-1(a) for justified use of deadly force (720 ILCS 5/7-1(a) (West 2008)). 2. Defendant also failed…”
People v. Guja (2016)
“" 720 ILCS 5/7-1(a) (West 2010). In order for a claim of self- defense to be proper, "the defendant must establish some evidence of each of the following elements: (1) force is threatened against a person; (2) the person threatened is not the aggressor; (3) the danger of harm…”
People v. Willingham (2020)
“720 ILCS 5/7-1(a)-(b) (West 2016) (“A person 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 great bodily harm to himself or another” as…”
— 720 ILCS 5/7-1(1)(a) — 2 cases
People v. McLENNON (2011)
“2d 144 ; see 720 ILCS 5/7-1 (West 2008) ("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.”
People v. McLennon (2011)
— 720 ILCS 5/7-1(a) — 146 cases
People v. McLENNON (2011)
“2d 144 ; see 720 ILCS 5/7-1 (West 2008) ("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.”
People v. Hodges (2009)
“720 ILCS 5/7-1 et seq. (West 2006). These include the right to use deadly force where a person "reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or another.”
People v. Rutigliano (2020)
“” 720 ILCS 5/7-1(a) (West 2016). See also 720 ILCS 5/7-14 (West 2016) (justifications in article 7 of the Criminal Code of 2012, including self-defense, are affirmative defenses).”
People v. Olaska (2017)
“" 720 ILCS 5/7-1(a) (West 2012). Thus, the elements of a self-defense claim 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)…”
People v. Harmon (2015)
“July 1, 2011)), does not suffice to satisfy section 2-8 to constitute a forcible felony (720 ILCS 5/2-8 (West 2008)) of the type that would justify using deadly force under section 7-1(a) for justified use of deadly force (720 ILCS 5/7-1(a) (West 2008)). 2. Defendant also failed…”
— 720 ILCS 5/7-1(b) — 2 cases
People v. Jackson (2022)
People v. Wiley (2025)
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.
|