Authors

Marc D. Falkoff

Document Type

Article

Abstract

Last month, a state appellate court reversed the conviction of Mark Downs —a gang member serving 70 years for the murder of a 6-year-old boy — because the trial court attempted to answer a jury question about the definition of reasonable doubt. The case marks at least the third time since 2011 that serious convictions have been overturned because a judge tried to explain the meaning of reasonable doubt to a jury. Although there was good reason to reverse the conviction in Downs, the legal premise the appellate court relied on was flawed. At this point, the Illinois Supreme Court should step in and set the lower courts straight.

Publication Date

6-25-2014

ISSN

0362-6148

Department

College of Law

Language

eng

Publisher

Chicago Daily Law Bulletin

Included in

Law Commons

Share

COinS