Bindinglaw

IL · jury_instructions

Ill. Pattern Jury Instr. (Criminal) 11.90X

Issues In Aggravated Stalking--Bodily Harm, Confinement, Or Restraint (As Of August 20,

activein force · 2026-08-19 – presentas-observed

1993)

To sustain the charge of aggravated stalking, the State must first prove that the defendant

committed the offense of stalking. To sustain the charge of stalking, the State must prove the

following propositions:

First Proposition: That the defendant on at least two separate occasions knowingly [

(followed ____) (placed ____ under surveillance) (followed or placed ____ under surveillance)];

and

[1] Second Proposition: That the defendant at any time knowingly transmitted a threat to

____ of immediate or future [(bodily harm) (sexual assault) (confinement) (restraint)].

[or]

[2] Second Proposition: That the defendant knowingly placed ____ in reasonable

apprehension of immediate or future [(bodily harm) (sexual assault) (confinement) (restraint)].

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that any one of these propositions

has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, your deliberations on these charges should end

and you should return a verdict of not guilty.

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each one of these propositions

has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you have concluded that the defendant

committed the offense of stalking. You should now go on with your deliberations to decide

whether the defendant is guilty of aggravated stalking.

To sustain the charge of aggravated stalking, the State must prove the following

additional proposition:

Third Proposition: That, in conjunction with committing the offense of stalking, the

defendant [(intentionally) (knowingly) (recklessly)] [(caused bodily harm to ____) (confined or

restrained ____)].

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that this Third Proposition has

also been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, you should find the defendant guilty of aggravated

stalking.

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that this Third Proposition has not

been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant not guilty of

aggravated stalking [and guilty of stalking].

Provenance

Source
illinoiscourts.gov
Retrieved
2026-08-20
Edition
2026-08-19
Content hash
5ca6b5c452942638cb4e341386d2169a4873ce2bc8f2dcbc0ba6beb2e1ea87f9
View the official source →

The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.

Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.

Coverage · API docs

Bindinglaw

Point-in-time US law with the receipt attached. Source URL, retrieval time, content hash, and validity dates on every answer.

curl api.binding.law/v1/law/coverage

© 2026 binding.law · a Jubal, Inc. productAttorneys and firms never pay. Ever.
Ill. Pattern Jury Instr. (Criminal) 11.90X · binding.law