Jury found that Defendant remained a sexually dangerous person. Defendant was not prejudiced by court's ruling not allowing him to impeach State's expert with an article that concludes in-custody treatment has no statistical effect on recidivism rates. This article does not counter State's position, and defense counsel was allowed to get this information into case by questioning expert about a 2005 study that showed that institutional treatment did not have a statistically significant effect on recidivism.Defendant was not prejudiced by State's comments about Defendant's conduct toward 2 minor girls. State's expert testified that Defendant had not recovered from being a sexually dangerous person as he failed to accept full responsibility. Jury's decision was not against manifest weight of the evidence. (STEIGMANN and HARRIS, concurring.)
Illinois Appellate Court
Criminal Court
Sexually Dangerous Persons Act