People v. Pulley

I respectfully dissent from the majority in this case because I am of the opinion that the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not on his own land at the time of the offense in this case.

The majority concludes that the testimony of the police officers that the buildings were CHA buildings and that their duties as CHA police officers were to patrol federally funded housing sites was sufficient evidence from which the trier of fact could infer that the defendant was not on his own land at the time of the offense in this case.

At the outset, I agree that the…