¶ 115 Defendant argues that the State failed to prove that the officers attempting to make the stop were in uniform and that an officer in a vehicle must have certain lights on the vehicle. In support of his argument, defendant relies on the Second District decision of People v. Murdock , 321 Ill. App. 3d 175, 254 Ill.Dec. 965, 748 N.E.2d 683 (2001). ¶ 116 In Murdock , the defendant was found guilty of aggravated fleeing or attempting to elude a peace officer, and on appeal, contended that there was no evidence presented that the officer pursuing him was in a police uniform.
¶ 129 Defendant argues that the State failed to prove that the officers attempting to make the stop were in uniform and that an officer in a vehicle must have certain lights on the vehicle. In support of his argument, defendant relies on the Second District decision of People v. Murdock, 321 Ill.App.3d 175, 254 Ill.Dec. 965, 748 N.E.2d 683 (2001). ¶ 130 In Murdock, the defendant was found guilty of aggravated fleeing or attempting to elude a peace officer, and on appeal, contended that there was no evidence presented that the officer pursuing him was in a police uniform.