Criminal Law

People v. Hill

People v. Hill
Illinois Appellate Court
Criminal Court
Evidence
Citation
Case Number: 
2014 IL App (2d) 130260
Decision Date: 
Monday, March 31, 2014
District: 
2d Dist.
Division/County: 
Kane Co.
Holding: 
Affirmed.
Justice: 
BURKE
Defendant was convicted of first-degree murder and aggravated arson for death of his girlfriend who died in her burning townhouse. Court properly admitted evidence of decedent's notes that she was planning to end relationship with Defendant, fought and argued with him, and was afraid of him. Notes handwritten by decedent were relevant to demonstrate decedent's state of mind, and were admitted for the effect they had an Defendant, as evidence was sufficient to establish basis for inference that Defendant had read the notes. Defense counsel's decision to proceed with general verdict form was trial strategy, not ineffective assistance of counsel. (ZENOFF and SCHOSTOK, concurring.)

People v. Warrington

People v. Warrington
Illinois Appellate Court
Criminal Court
Jury Instructions
Citation
Case Number: 
2014 IL App (3d) 110772
Decision Date: 
Wednesday, April 2, 2014
District: 
3d Dist.
Division/County: 
Warren Co.
Holding: 
Reversed and remanded.
Justice: 
WRIGHT
Defendant was arrested for felony offense of threatening a public official, a police officer and resisting arrest, a misdemeanor. Charging information did not include specific statutory language as to victim being a police officer. Court erred by failing to give jury instruction which included element of offense requiring State to prove Defendant communicated a unique threat to a police officer. (McDADE and O'BRIEN, concurring.)

People v. Cerda

People v. Cerda
Illinois Appellate Court
Criminal Court
Sexual Assault
Citation
Case Number: 
2014 IL App (1st) 120484
Decision Date: 
Friday, March 7, 2014
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co., 5th Div.
Holding: 
Affirmed.
Justice: 
GORDON
(Court opinion corrected 4/1/14.) Defendant was convicted, after jury trial, of criminal sexual assault of his stepdaughter over 11-month period. Court properly admitted evidence of Defendant's assault of another stepdaughter, as the offenses were sufficiently similar. Court properly barred evidence, per rape shield statute, that victim's initial outcry occurred shortly after she had informed her mother about her first sexual experience with a boy her age. Court did not abuse discretion in barring evidence, as there was no evidence that victim was motivated to lie, and there was other evidence in record to support argument that outcry was a fabrication by victim to deflect her mother's anger about her acting out. (McBRIDE and TAYLOR, concurring.)

Davis v. Humphreys

Federal 7th Circuit Court
Davis v. Humphreys
Criminal Court
Habeas Corpus
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 13-1326
Decision Date: 
April 1, 2014
Federal District: 
E.D. Wisc.
Holding: 
Vacated and remanded
Dist. Ct. erred in denying defendant’s motion seeking leave to file late habeas petition, where defendant asserted that his mental limitations excused his untimely filing on equitable tolling grounds. While Dist. Ct. found that defendant’s ability to file instant motion demonstrated mental competency that disqualified him from seeking equitable tolling relief, remand was required to determine defendant’s actual abilities to determine whether equitable tolling applies.

U.S. v. Long

Federal 7th Circuit Court
U.S. v. Long
Criminal Court
Conspiracy
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 11-3888 et al. Cons.
Decision Date: 
April 1, 2014
Federal District: 
N.D. Ill., E. Div.
Holding: 
Affirmed and vacated in part and remanded
Record contained sufficient evidence to support defendants’ convictions on drug conspiracy charges, even though one co-conspirator testified that two defendants were only customers of said conspiracy, where record showed that: (1) said defendants made multiple purchases of wholesale quantity of drugs on credit; (2) one defendant was allowed to purchase drugs at preferential price not offered to normal customers; and (3) said defendants engaged in discussion with co-conspirator regarding expansion of their business. Dist. Ct. erred, though, in failing to use guidelines under Fair Sentencing Act that were in force at time of sentencing when calculating defendants’ sentences. However, with respect to sentences of three defendants, any error was harmless either because Dist. Ct. indicated that it would have imposed same sentence if Fair Sentencing Act applied, or because jury would have made same drug quantity calculation that Dist. Ct. made.

People v. Randolph

People v. Randolph
Illinois Appellate Court
Criminal Court
Hearsay
Citation
Case Number: 
2014 IL App (1st) 113624
Decision Date: 
Wednesday, March 26, 2014
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co., 3d Div.
Holding: 
Reversed.
Justice: 
MASON
(Court opinion corrected 3/31/14.) Defendant was convicted, after jury trial, of possession of less than 15 grams of cocaine. Court erred in allowing prosecution to elicit testimony from officer as to statements in his report that were consistent with his trial testimony.Questions posed on cross-examination would not permit introduction of prior consistent statements. As State's case hinged entirely on credibility of officers, when officers were impeached with facts omitted from their reports, State should not have been permitted to bolster their credibility with prior consistent statements that did not explain those omissions. (HYMAN and PUCINSKI, concurring.)

U.S. v. Johnson

Federal 7th Circuit Court
U.S. v. Johnson
Criminal Court
Sentencing
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 13-2732
Decision Date: 
March 31, 2014
Federal District: 
C.D. Ill.
Holding: 
Affirmed
Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s motion under 18 USC section 3582(c)(2) to reduce his 60-month term of incarceration on crack cocaine possession charges even though defendant contended that reduction was warranted in light of retroactive change in sentencing guidelines applicable to crack cocaine offenses. Record showed that defendant’s sentence was based on applicable 120-month mandatory minimum for repeat drug offenders that had been reduced due to defendant’s cooperation with police officials, such that, under Poole, reduction under section 3582(c)(2) was improper if original sentence was based on statutory minimum sentence.

U.S. v. Malone

Federal 7th Circuit Court
U.S. v. Malone
Criminal Court
Restitution
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 13-2432
Decision Date: 
March 31, 2014
Federal District: 
C.D. Ill.
Holding: 
Affirmed
Dist. Ct. did not err in ordering defendant to pay $285,000 in restitution as part of his sentence on charges of bank fraud and money laundering arising out of scheme to sell victim $400,000 in non-existent cattle. Said order represented difference between what defendant had received from victim and $115,000 that defendant had refunded to victim, which was appropriate calculation under Mandatory Victims Restitution Act (MVRA). Fact that defendant and victim were also involved in dispute to determine ownership of certain cattle that victim had taken from defendant’s feedlot in self-help attempt to obtain what was owed to victim did not require different result. Ct. also rejected defendant’s claim that complexity exemption under MVRA applied so as to preclude imposition of any restitution award, where Dist. Ct. properly concluded that instant calculation was not complicated.

SJRCA 7

Topic: 
Constitutional amendment for judges
(Cunningham, D-Chicago) amends the Judiciary Article of the Illinois Constitution relating to the eligibility to be elected or appointed as a Judge or Associate Judge in a county with a population of three million or more. Provides that to be eligible for election or appointment as a Judge or Associate Judge after the adoption of the Amendment, the person must have actively practiced law in the State for at least 10 years before his or her election or appointment as a Judge or Associate Judge and his or her license to practice law in the State must not have been suspended or revoked for disciplinary reasons by the Supreme Court. Provides that in order to be eligible for election or retention as a Judge, or appointment or reappointment as an Associate Judge, after the adoption of the Amendment, the person must have been certified as qualified to be a Judge or Associate Judge by at least 5 members of the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission of the Supreme Court of Illinois. Provides that the certification is for 2 years and the person is subject to recertification if the person meets the requirements. Provides that the retention of an elected Judge requires a two-thirds vote (currently three-fifths). Provides that before a candidate for Judge is eligible to circulate petitions or be placed on the ballot for nomination, election or retention as a Supreme, Appellate and Circuit Judge, he or she must be certified as qualified to hold the office of Judge by the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission of the Supreme Court of Illinois. Effective upon adoption and applies only to persons seeking election or appointment as a Judge or Associate Judge after the adoption of the Amendment. Scheduled for a hearing in the Senate this Thursday.
View Full Text of Legislation

U.S. v. Sandoval

Federal 7th Circuit Court
U.S. v. Sandoval
Criminal Court
Sentencing
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 13-3050
Decision Date: 
March 28, 2014
Federal District: 
N.D. Ill., E. Div.
Holding: 
Affirmed
Dist. Ct. did not err in sentencing defendant to 140-month term of incarceration on attempted possession of cocaine charge, where said sentence was based in part on obstruction of justice enhancement involving defendant’s continued use of alias during and after his arrest, as well as Dist. Ct.’s withholding of downward adjustment based on his guilty plea. Defendant’s use of fake identity was sufficient to support obstruction of justice enhancement where defendant’s use of fake identity influenced Dist. Ct. to initially release him following his indictment. Moreover, said obstruction supported denial of defendant’s request for downward adjustment based on his guilty plea, and defendant otherwise did not enter said plea until shortly before trial.