Defendant was convicted, after jury trial, of escape, obstruction of a peace officer, and aggravated assault. Officers held Defendant by the arms and walked him toward squad car before he broke free of their grip. There was sufficient evidence to prove that he was in lawful custody before breaking away. Court explained all 4 Zehr principles to jurors and asked if they accepted the 4 principles, but court failed to fully comply with Rule 431(b) as court did not ask whether jurors understood the principles. Defendant failed to object during voir dire, and no plain error as evidence was not closely balanced. Defendant was charged with aggravated assault, rather than simple assault, because victim was a police officer. A threat of serious harm is not inherent in that charge. Court most likely found that Defendant's conduct threatened serious harm because he ran across the street, putting officers in danger from vehicles as they pursued him. (CATES and BARBERIS, concurring.)
Illinois Appellate Court
Criminal Court
Escape