Defendant was convicted, after jury trial, of 5 counts of 1st degree murder and 1 count of armed robbery. Court properly denied Defendant's motion to suppress, as his statements (including statement implicating him in the murders), given before he invoked his right to counsel, were voluntarily given despite the denial of his requests to make a phone call, which did not render his statements involuntary. At no time prior to his invocation of counsel did Defendant state phone call was to request an attorney or request of his family that they find him an attorney. State used historical cell phone site data and Defendant's statement that he was a lookout to implicate him in the crimes. A Frye hearing was not required because information conveyed is not the result of new or novel scientific principles. State introduced evidence to show that cell phones, and by implication their owner, were in vicinity of crimes during relevant time. Discussion of possible sentence, within interrogation video, did not unfairly prejudice Defendant, as court admonished jury to disregard that discussion. (SIMON, concurring; MIKVA, specially concurring).
Illinois Appellate Court
Criminal Court
Motions to Suppress