People v. Lampley 

Defendant was convicted, after jury trial, of burglary. Court did not abuse its discretion in not ruling on Defendant's motion in limine as to admissibility of his prior burglary conviction until immediately after denying Defendant's motion for directed verdict, as Defendant had the benefit of the court's ruling on his motion in limine prior to presenting his case and prior to his decision whether to testify. Court erred by asking venire whether they had "any problems" with Zehr principles during voir dire, but as evidence against Defendant was overwhelming, and failure to question each juror specifically was not serious, error was not reversible. (QUINN and STEELE, concurring.)