People v. Hill 

Defendant was convicted, after jury trial, of possession of controlled substance with intent to deliver, and delivery of controlled substance, and was sentenced to 12 concurrent prison terms. In voir dire, court initially mentioned three Zehr principles, and left the fourth for questioning by defense counsel; next two panels were asked only a general question about principles mentioned earlier, with voir dire on various subjects in the interim. Although court did not give each juror opportunity to respond as to all Zehr principles, no plain error, as no evidence that jury was biased due to error. Court's "blanket policy" on deferring ruling on admissibility of prior convictions does not violate right to testify. (QUINN and MURPHY, concurring.)