(Court opinion corrected 6/5/19.) Defendant was convicted, after jury trial, of armed violence and the predicate offense of possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver. As there was no finding, and no evidence, that Defendant caused anyone great bodily harm, he is eligible to receive day-for-day credit on his sentence for armed violence. At the moment that Defendant had "immediate access to or timely control over" his weapon, he was in possession fo the narcotics, which were only a few feet away from him, and thus his armed-violence conviction is affirmed. State's experienced narcotics investigator could testify only from his specialized training, rather than his personal observations, in narcotics investigation, as a proper foundation for expert testimony. As State never tendered him as an expert in drug distribution, admission of his testimony as to drug paraphernalia, as lay opinion, was error. However, error was harmless, because State easily proved that Defendant intended to sell the cocaine. (FITZGERALD SMITH and HOWSE, concurring.)
Illinois Appellate Court
Criminal Court
Sentencing