People v. Manning, 115 N.E.3d 45

In 2008 Arthur Manning was retried for first degree murder (stabbed victim; defendant admitted two stabbings); jury received self‑defense and second degree murder instructions (mitigating factors: sudden/intense passion or unreasonable belief in need for self‑defense).
Statute requires jury first unanimously find the State proved first degree murder beyond a reasonable doubt before considering whether defendant proved a mitigating factor by a preponderance.
During deliberations the jury asked whether a non‑unanimous vote on a mitigating factor would “revert” to first degree murder; the court replied only that the verdict must be unanimous and to continue deliberating.
Jury returned a unanimous verdict of guilty of first degree murder; defense asked to poll jurors specifically on whether each found a mitigating factor, but the court used the standard polling question only.
On appeal the trial court’s answer to the jury was deemed invited error; the appellate court nevertheless reversed the conviction because it held the trial court abused its discretion by refusing to poll jurors about whether any juror found a mitigating factor. The Illinois Supreme Court granted review.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (People)	Defendant's Argument (Manning)	Held
Whether jurors’ inability to unanimously agree a mitigating factor exists converts a unanimous finding of first degree murder into a non‑unanimous verdict (i.e., whether non‑unanimity on mitigation reverts to first degree or causes a hung jury)	The statutory sequence requires a unanimous finding of first degree murder first; failure to unanimously find mitigation does not nullify that unanimous first degree finding — so non‑unanimity on mitigation results in first degree murder.	If some jurors find a mitigating factor and others do not, jury is not unanimous on guilt of first degree murder and result should not be first degree; defendant argued the jury should be polled on mitigation and that non‑unanimity on mitigation affected the verdict.	Court held non‑unanimity on mitigation does not negate the jury’s unanimous finding of first degree murder; the trial court’s instruction and standard poll were adequate.

People v. Jeffries, 164 Ill.2d 104 (explaining second degree murder is first degree murder plus defendant’s proof of mitigation by a preponderance)
People v. Fort, 2017 IL 118966 (rejecting statutory readings that produce unjust or absurd results)
People v. Staake, 2017 IL 121755 (reiterating that the State must prove elements of first degree murder before jury may consider second degree)
People v. Raue, 236 Ill. App. 3d 948 (similar fact pattern; appellate court upheld standard rephrasing of instruction and standard jury polling)
People v. Wilmington, 2013 IL 112938 (presumption that jurors follow instructions)