Criminal Law

(Modified upon denial of rehearing 9/23/19.) Defendant, and his grandmother, were charged with multiple counts of 1st degree murder and solicitation of murder for his role in the death of his grandfather. Defendant was convicted, after jury trial, of 1st degree murder. Evidence is insufficient to establish that 2 persons named by Defendant played a role in the planning or commission of the murder. Thus, court did not abuse its discretion in denying Defendant's request to give IPI 3.17, the accomplice witness instruction. Good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule does not apply and evidence of Defendant's  cellular site location information (CSLI) data, which State obtained without a warrant, should have been excluded. However, evidence against Defendant was overwhelming and admission of CSLI data was harmless error.(MIKVA and GRIFFIN, concurring.)

(Court opinion corrected 9/17/19.) Defendant, age 21 at time of hearing, was charged with 1 count of armed robbery with a firearm. Court denied his motion for bail pending trial. Defendant filed motion for review of bail denial, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 604( c). Court properly considered circumstances that Defendant “only” pointed a gun at unarmed victim’s waist and his co-offender pointed a gun at victim’s head, while victim was returning home from work. Minimum sentence of 21 years was substantial motivation to flee; and Defendant’s inculpatory statement to police weighed heavily in favor of conviction. Denial of bail was not arbitrary, fanciful or unreasonable.  (CUNNINGHAM and CONNORS, concurring.)

Defendant was charged with 1 count of causing child endangerment, alleging that she left her 3-month-old infant unattended and alone in a residence. Court erred in granting Defendant's motion to suppress evidence. After tip that a minor was left inside the residence unattended, officer looked through window and saw a small crib with a foot moving up and down; when infant's father and the Defendant returned from a bar and entered the house, officer, without a warrant, followed him inside. It was not objectively unreasonable for responding officers to continue, rather than terminate, their community caretaking function and for them to wish to enter the home and see that the infant was then safe and not in danger or in potential danger. It was not objectively unreasonable for officer to glance into each room he passed to see if anyone else was present, as he did so in part for officer safety purposes.(CHAPMAN and BARBERIS, concurring.)

Defendant was convicted, after jury trial, of 1st degree murder in shooting death of one person. Court properly entered 1st stage dismissal of his postconviction petition. No ineffective assistance of appellate counsel or due process violation in trial court admitting grand jury testimony of 2 witnesses and written and videotaped statements of one of those witnesses whose grand jury testimony was nearly identical to those statements. Both witnesses had no personal knowledge of the shooting but only of the Defendant's statement admitting to it. Although such evidence was not substantively admissible, it was cumulative to properly admitted evidence.(DELORT and HARRIS, concurring.)

Defendant was convicted, after jury trial, of unlawful possession of methamphetamine. Someone had called to police to report a man in a blue sweatshirt, on a bicycle, who was yelling profanities and acting erratically, and shortly afterward, police located Defendant, who matched the description. Officer attempted to effectuate a Terry stop, but he fled. Officer was justified in trying to effectuate a Terry stop, as tip was reliable, and officer was attempting to investigate whether Defendant committed disorderly conduct. Defendant's act of fleeing, after repeated orders to stop, and combined with the tip, gave officer probable cause to arrest him for resisting a peace officer. A Terry stop is not justified only upon a reasonable suspicion of ongoing criminal activity, but instead of past, present, or pending criminal activity.(DeARMOND, concurring; CAVANAGH, specially concurring.)

Defendant was convicted of defacing the identification marks of a firearm. Court properly denied Defendant's motion to quash and suppress. Officer, while patrolling area of recent gang conflict retaliatory shootings, made eye contact with Defendant and one other person walking on sidewalk, who then immediately broke apart.  Defendant was then adjusting and grabbing at something in his waistband. Defendant continued to grab at his waistband; officer placed his hand over Defendant's hand to effectuate a pat-down, and found a loaded handgun with the serial numbers scratched off. Officer's actions were justified; Defendant's conduct supported reasonable inference that he was trying to shield an item from view. A Terry stop was warranted under totality of the circumstances, and limited search for weapons on Defendant's person was warranted.(PIERCE and WALKER, concurring.)

Defendant entered open guilty plea to unlawful delivery of a controlled substance, for selling 1 ounce of cocaine to an undercover officer for $1,000; and he was sentenced to 25 years. No ineffective assistance of appellate counsel in failing to raise issue as to judge's comment, during sentencing, as to amount of cocaine being significant. Legislature intended for court to be allowed to consider amount of drugs as an aggravating factor. No merit to double enhancement argument. (CARTER and LYTTON, concurring.)