IL · jury_instructions
Ill. Pattern Jury Instr. (Criminal) 22.20
Issues In Obstructing Justice
To sustain the charge of obstructing justice, the State must prove the following
propositions:
First Proposition: That the defendant knowingly [(destroyed) (altered) (concealed)
(disguised)] physical evidence; and
Second Proposition: That doing so materially interfered with the administration of
justice; and
Third Proposition: That the defendant did so with intent to [(prevent the apprehension)
(obstruct the prosecution) (obstruct the defense)] of ____.
[or]
First Proposition: That the defendant knowingly [(planted false evidence) (furnished
false information)]; and
Second Proposition: That the false [(evidence) (information)] materially interfered with
the administration of justice; and
Third Proposition: That the defendant did so with intent to [(prevent the apprehension)
(obstruct the prosecution) (obstruct the defense)] of ____.
[or]
First Proposition: That ____(witness) was a witness having knowledge of ____(subject
at issue); and
Second Proposition: That the defendant induced ____(witness) [(to leave the State)
(conceal himself)]; and
Third Proposition: That the defendant did so with intent to [(prevent the apprehension)
(obstruct the prosecution) (obstruct the defense)] of ____.
[or]
First Proposition: That the defendant had knowledge material to the subject at issue; and
Second Proposition: That the defendant [(left the state) (concealed himself)]; and
Third Proposition: That the defendant did so with intent to [(prevent the apprehension)
(obstruct the prosecution) (obstruct the defense)] of ____.
[or]
First Proposition: That the defendant is a [(parent) (legal guardian) (caretaker)] of a
child under 13 years of age; and
Second Proposition: That the defendant knowingly reported materially false information
to a [(law enforcement agency) (medical examiner) (coroner) (State’s Attorney) (other
governmental agency)] during the investigation of the disappearance or death of that child.
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.
Provenance
- Source
- illinoiscourts.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-10
- Edition
- 2026-09-10
- Content hash
adf46a67ab05e7f5c5d11ac829075f5eac3991d886110d3cad6c4259a82aa423
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.