People v. Burlington

Defendant was convicted, after jury trial, of burglary, after he attempted to take video recording system from retail store without paying for it. Entry of a public building with intent to commit theft constitutes an entry "without authority". Court conducted balancing test and found that probative value of Defendant's prior residential burglary and burglary convictions outweighed danger of unfair prejudice. Neither convictions were remote in time to offenses at issue. Defendant's retail theft conviction was similar to burglary charge. Court gave IPI Criminal No. 3.13, stating that prior convictions were to be considered only as to Defendant's credibility and not as evidence of Defendant's guilt. (KNECHT and DeARMOND, concurring.)