People v. Jackson

Defendant was convicted, after jury trial, of possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver. Evidence was sufficient to demonstrate that Defendant had constructive possession of the heroin. Court committed clear error in asking potential jurors to raise their hands if they had a "problem" or "disagreement" with the Zehr principles. State's evidence was strong and unrefuted, and evidence was not closely balancede; thus, no relief under plain error doctrine. (MASON and PUCINSKI, concurring.)