Did the Appellate Court of Illinois violate due process by refusing to substitute their judgment for the Trier of Fact and denying an affirmative defense based on sufficiency of evidence?

1. Did the blanket refusal, by the Appellate Court of Illinois, to ‘substitute their judgement for that of the Trier of Fact ’, deny an affirmative defense ‘Sufficiency of Evidence to prove essential elements of the Crime ’ to the Defense on Appeal and thus violate Due Process? 2. Did the Trial Court commit constitutional error when closing arguments gave contradicting jury instructions, referring to the importance of essential elements and their specifics, and the Court failed to admonish the jury on the issue it presented? 3. Did the Court(s) allow for too much “other bad acts” (of uncharged incidents) and thereby deny the defendant a fair trial? 4. Are Illinois Courts bound by Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460, 479 (2012)? 2