Ill. Pattern Jury Instr. (Criminal) 16.14

To sustai

n the charge of criminal damage to [(State) (government)] supported property,

the State must prove the following propositions:

[1] First Proposition: That the defendant knowingly damaged any property supported in

whole or in part with [(State funds) (Federal funds administered or granted through State

agencies) (funds of a local government or school district)]; and

Second Proposition: That the defendant did so without the consent of the State[; and

Third Proposition: That the damage to the property [(exceeded $500) (exceeded

$10,000) (exceeded $100,000)]].

[or]

[2] First

Proposition: That the defendant knowingly, by means of [(fire) (explosive)],

damaged property supported in whole or in part with [(State funds) (Federal funds administered

or granted through State agencies) (funds of a local government or school district)] [; and

Second Proposition: That the damage to the property [(exceeded $500) (exceeded

$10,000) (exceeded $100,000)]].

[or]

[3] First

Proposition: That the defendant knowingly started a fire on property supported

in whole or in part by [(State funds) (Federal funds administered or granted throu gh State

agencies) (funds of a local government or school district)]; and

Second Proposition: That the defendant did so without the consent of the State[; and

Third Proposition: That the damage to the property [(exceeded $500) (exceeded

$10,000) (exceeded $100,000)]].

[or]

[4] First

Proposition: That the defendant knowingly deposited [(on the land) (in the

building)] supported in whole or in part by [(State funds) (Federal funds administered or

granted through State agencies) (funds of a local government or school)] [(a stink bomb) (an

offensive smelling compound)]; and

Second Proposition: That the defendant did so with the intent to interfere with the use by

another of the [(land) (building)]; and

Third Proposition: That the defendant did so without the consent of the State[; and

Fourth Proposition: That the damage to the property [(exceeded $500) (exceeded

$10,000) (exceeded $100,000)]].

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

has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, you should find the defendant guilty.

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

has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, you should find the defendant not guilty.

Committe

e Note

_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

720 ILCS 5/

21-4 (West, 1994) (formerly Ill.Rev.Stat. ch. 38, §21- 4), amended by P.A.

86-1254, effective January 1, 1991<us>; and P.A. 89-31, effective January 1, 1996</us>.

P.A. 89-31 ame

nded Section 21-4 by (1) changing the title of the offense from “Criminal

Damage to State Supported Property” to “Criminal Damage to Government Supported Property,”

and (2) adding that the offense can be committed when property supported by “funds of a local

government or school district” is damaged. However, these changes become effective January 1,

1996, and apply prospectively only.

Do not use eit

her bracketed alternative “government” or “funds of a local government or

school district” for offenses allegedly occurring before January 1, 1996.

Give I

nstruction 16.13.

The Commi

ttee has included the amount of the damage of the property as an issue to be

resolved by the jury because Section 21- 4(1) sets forth different penalties depending on the

damage to the property in question. See People v. Mays, 80 Ill.App.3d 340, 399 N.E.2d 718, 35

Ill.Dec. 652 (3d Dist.1980). Accordingly, the Committee has included the final proposition in

each set of propositions which should be given when the value of the property exceeds $500.

If the am

ount of damage to the property is an issue, then separate definitional

instructions, issues instructions, and verdict forms should be given to permit the jury to resolve

that dispute with its verdict. Under these circumstances, the jury should receive instructions and

verdict forms for both the greater and lesser offenses. In addition, the name of the offense should

be expanded in each definitional instruction, issue instruction, and verdict form so as to

distinguish the greater offense from the lesser offense. For example, if the value of the property

exceeds $500, then this instruction would begin “To sustain the cha rge of criminal damage to

State supported property in excess of $500, the State must prove ....”

Use appli

cable bracketed material.

The bracket

ed numbers are present solely for the guidance of court and counsel and

should not be included in the instruction submitted to the jury.

When acc

ountability is an issue, ordinarily insert the phrase “or one for whose conduct he

is legally responsible” after the word “defendant” in each proposition. See Instruction 5.03.

_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________