Illinois Appellate Court
Criminal Court
One-Act-One-Crime Doctrine
Defendant appealed from his convictions for being an armed habitual criminal and unlawful use of a weapon by a felon, arguing that the State did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he possessed an actual firearm, that the statutes criminalizing the possession of a weapon by a felon are unconstitutional, and that defendant’s convictions violated the one-act, one-crime doctrine. The appellate court affirmed in part and vacated in part, finding that defendant’s convictions violated the one-act, one-crime doctrine but otherwise affirming the convictions. (HETTEL and PETERSON, concurring)