United States Seventh Circuit

In action brought against a police officer for deprivation of a suspect's right to be free from unreasonable seizure, conviction is affirmed where: 1) district court did not err in authorizing the jury to consider defendant's prior inconsistent statements for their truth; 2) the court's jury instruction on bodily injury was not in error as an incorrect statement of the law, particularly because defendant failed to offer an alternative definition of bodily injury; 3) the court did not err in its jury instruction on reasonable force; and 4) the court did not err in refusing to give a missing witness instruction.

Appellate Information

• Decided 05/04/2009
• Published 05/04/2009

Judges

• TINDER, Circuit Judge., Before EASTERBROOK, Chief Judge, and SYKES and TINDER, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Seventh Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Erik Hogstrom (argued), Office of the United States Attorney, Chicago, IL, for Plaintiff-Appellee., Alexander M. Salerno (argued), North Riverside, IL, for Defendant-Appellant.