Defendant was found guilty of first-degree murder and sentenced to 80 years in prison. On appeal, he argued that the State failed to prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt because his conviction rested on a single eyewitness who initially misidentified him. Defendant also argued that the trial court improperly admitted evidence that was more prejudicial than probative and that the State violated his right to a speedy trial. The appellate court rejected defendant’s claim regarding the sufficiency of the evidence, finding that the testimony against him was not unreasonable, improbable, or unsatisfactory. The court also found defendant’s right to a speedy trial was not violated despite a lengthy pretrial custody. However, it agreed with defendant that video evidence containing statements by a police officer that bolstered the credibility of the eyewitness was more prejudicial than probative and reversed and remanded for a new trial. (HOWES and COBBS, concurring)
Illinois Appellate Court
Criminal Court
Sufficiency of Evidence
Speedy Trial