People v. Woods

This case presents question in instant prosecution on charge of aggravated battery of child whether trial court incorrectly instructed jury on accountability under circumstances where government contended that defendant was guilty of said offense both as principal and under doctrine of accountability, where co-defendant was also charged with same offense. While defendant argued that jury received contrary and conflicting instructions on accountability doctrine with respect to appropriate mental state, where one instruction told jury that defendant could be accountable if she did not know, but should have known of actions taken by co-defendant against child, Appellate Court, in affirming defendant’s conviction, found that there was no confusion or inconsistency in instant issue instructions, where: (1) prosecutor explicitly argued that defendant was aware of child’s injuries and had failed to act to protect child from co-defendant; and (2) evidence overwhelmingly established that defendant was actually aware of child injuries, and that defendant was principal just as much as she was accountable for co-defendant’s acts against child.