Court Opinion

ID: 9709012
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 03:37:57.766122+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:22:45.401125
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE GOLDENHERSH, concurring in part and dissenting in part: I agree with that part of the opinion which holds that the circuit court erred in directing a verdict on the issue of section 2 — 202 immunity. I dissent, however, because I am of the opinion that the majority has erred in holding that there should have been a verdict directed in favor of defendant. On this record, the evidence of Officer Daley’s withdrawal to a point 30 or 40 feet distant from the center of the activity presented a question of fact whether he was engaging in the execution or enforcement of any law or withdrawing from the scene until reenforcements arrived. The officer’s testimony concerning his intentions is of no value, and there is, of course, no source of evidence other than his conduct to refute his statements. In view of the evidence, it was the province of the jury to determine whether, at the time, the officer was departing the scene, or merely executing a maneuver in the course of executing or enforcing a law.