(DOWNLOAD) "People v. Halliday" by Illinois Appellate Court Fifth District Judgment Affirmed ~ eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: People v. Halliday
- Author : Illinois Appellate Court Fifth District Judgment Affirmed
- Release Date : January 18, 1985
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 56 KB
Description
The issue defendant presents for review is whether, in defendant's trial for involuntary manslaughter, the trial court erred by refusing to give defendant's tendered jury instruction defining negligence. We note at the outset that the offense with which the defendant was charged, involuntary manslaughter, requires the State to show that the perpetrator's mental state was one of recklessness. (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1983, ch. 38, par. 9-3.) Defendant's theory, however, is that his acts were negligent, with the result that he is not guilty of involuntary manslaughter. The Illinois criminal statutes define negligence as the failure to be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1983, ch. 38, par. 4-7), while recklessness is defined as the conscious disregard of such risk (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1983, ch. 38, par. 4-6). The instruction tendered by the defendant, Illinois Pattern Jury Instruction, Criminal, No. 5.02 (2d ed. 1981), essentially repeats the Illinois statutory definition of negligence. The Illinois Supreme Court has held that ""[c]riminal liability cannot be predicated upon every act carelessly performed merely because such carelessness results in the death of another. Negligence, to become criminal, must necessarily be reckless or wanton and of such a character as to show an utter disregard of the safety of others under circumstances likely to cause injury."" (People v. Sikes (1927), 328 Ill. 64, 74, 159 N.E. 293, 297.) Since it is evident that simple negligence cannot form the basis for a homicide prosecution in Illinois, the defendant employs his negligence argument to show that he was not reckless and, therefore, not guilty.