People v. Millsap

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that giving jury accountability instruction in response to question introduced new theory into the case where the State argued only that defendant was responsible as a principal
• holding that the defendant was deprived of his due process right to make an argument in opposition to an accountability theory where the trial judge instructed the jury on accountability in response to a jury question after the jury had begun deliberations
• considering (and rejecting) the State’s theory that error in responding to the jury’s question was harmless
• reversing defendant's conviction where court instructed jury on attempt after closing arguments because \defendant was possibly convicted based upon a theory that he was never given a chance to address\
• reversing defendant’s conviction where court instructed jury on attempt after closing arguments because “defendant was possibly convicted based upon a theory that he was never given a chance to address”
• because defendant might have been convicted on theory that defendant had no opportunity to address in closing argument, error was not harmless

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).