Criminal Law

People v. Watt

People v. Watt
Illinois Appellate Court
Criminal Court
Hearsay
Citation
Case Number: 
2013 IL App (2d) 120183
Decision Date: 
Thursday, November 21, 2013
District: 
2d Dist.
Division/County: 
Lake Co.
Holding: 
Affirmed as modified.
Justice: 
ZENOFF
Defendant and three co-Defendants were charged in 18-count indictment. Court erred in giving IPI Criminal 14.05 and 14.06, as they have not been modified to reflect 2000 amendment to statute which provides that armed robbery with a "dangerous weapon" no longer exists. Court properly admitted victim's 911 call as excited utterance. Court was within its discretion in sentencing Defendant to 26 years, 18 years, and 26 years, to run concurrently, given aggravating factors including 25-year sentence for felony murder and escape from prison on that sentence. (HUDSON and BIRKETT, concurring.)

People v. Jackson

People v. Jackson
Illinois Appellate Court
Criminal Court
Witnesses
Citation
Case Number: 
2013 IL App (3d) 120205
Decision Date: 
Tuesday, November 26, 2013
District: 
3d Dist.
Division/County: 
Peoria Co.
Holding: 
Affirmed in part and reversed in part; remanded with instructions.
Justice: 
HOLDRIDGE
Defendant was convicted, after jury trial, of attempted first degree murder and aggravated battery, and sentenced to 60 years. Detective's testimony that Defendant's initial statement to him was a lie was opinion testimony, and was improperly admitted as detective was a lay witness, but was not plain error as testimony as to interview corroborated victim's version of events, and outcome of case would not have been different. No ineffective assistance of counsel claim, as defense counsel's decision not to object to detective's opinion testimony was strategic, and counsel used detective's lack of memory for impeachment. Sentence was not excessive given serious criminal history. (CARTER and O'BRIEN, concurring.)

People v. Rios

People v. Rios
Illinois Appellate Court
Criminal Court
Habeas Corpus
Citation
Case Number: 
2013 IL App (1st) 121072
Decision Date: 
Tuesday, November 26, 2013
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co., 2d Div.
Holding: 
Affirmed.
Justice: 
PIERCE
(Court opinion corrected 11/27/13.) Defendant was convicted of murder and attempted murder, after bench trial before judge who was later removed after JIB found that he used deception in violating residency requirements for sitting judges per Election Code. Collateral attack on judge's authority raised in habeas corpus proceeding does not render Defendant's conviction and sentence void because judge was removed from office. Trial court had subject matter jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction over the Defendant, and thus conviction and sentence are not void. (HARRIS and SIMON, concurring.)

People v. Smith

Illinois Supreme Court PLAs
People v. Smith
Criminal Court
Sentencing
Citation
PLA issue Date: 
November 27, 2013
Docket Number: 
No. 116572
District: 
3rd Dist.
This case presents question as to whether trial court properly dismissed defendant’s post-conviction petition alleging that his guilty plea to murder charge must be vacated under White, 2011 IL 109616, where defendant claimed that his plea agreement and 30-year sentence were void because he was neither admonished of, nor did his sentence include, mandatory firearm enhancement, which was statutorily required given factual basis for said plea. Appellate Court, in reversing trial court, found that holding in White applied retroactively to cases on collateral review. In its petition for leave to appeal, State argued that Appellate Court’s retroactivity finding conflicted with decision in Avery, 2012 Il App (1st) 110298.

People v. Simpson

Illinois Supreme Court PLAs
People v. Simpson
Criminal Court
Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
Citation
PLA issue Date: 
November 27, 2013
Docket Number: 
No. 116512
District: 
1st Dist.
This case presents question as to whether defendant was entitled to new trial in instant murder charge under claim that he received ineffective assistance of counsel due to counsel’s failure to object to jury’s watching of video recording of witness’ prior inconsistent statement telling police that defendant had confessed to instant murder. Appellate Court, in finding that defendant had received ineffective assistance of counsel, found that video recording of said statement was inadmissible under 725 ILCS 5/115-10.1(c)(2) because witness did not have personal knowledge of events that were subject of admission. In its petition for leave to appeal, State argued that relevant “event” for purposes of section 115-10.1(c)(2) was witness observing defendant make confession, as opposed to witness observing defendant committing instant murder.

People v. Burk

Illinois Supreme Court PLAs
People v. Burk
Criminal Court
Eavesdropping Act
Citation
PLA issue Date: 
November 27, 2013
Docket Number: 
No. 116666
District: 
2nd Dist.
This case presents question as to whether, in instant prosecution on charge of unlawful possession of controlled substance, trial court properly admitted statements of defendant and others that were recorded by device in police squad car while defendant and others were in squad car, where defendant claimed that said recorded statements violated Eavesdropping Act, since recorded conversation took place while officer was not in squad car. Appellate Court, in affirming trial court, found that exemption under section 14-3(h)(5) of said Act applied so as to permit admissibility of recorded statement, because recording took place while officer was in vicinity of squad car.

People v. Colbert

People v. Colbert
Illinois Appellate Court
Criminal Court
Sentencing
Citation
Case Number: 
2013 IL App (1st) 112935
Decision Date: 
Friday, November 8, 2013
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co., 6th Div.
Holding: 
Affirmed.
Justice: 
HALL
(Court opinion corrected 11/27/13.) Defendant was convicted, after jury trial, of first degree felony murder based on predicate felony of mob action in beating death, and sentenced to 32 years in prison. Defendant's conduct in participating in mob action arose from ongoing feud between two factions of high school students from rival neighborhoods; it not arise from and was not inherent in murder, but involved conduct with independent felonious purpose other than the murder itself Sentence was within statutory range, and no evidence that judge failed to consider Defendant's rehabilitative potential or other mitigating factors. (ROCHFORD and REYES, concurring.)

Lucas v. Prisoner Review Board

Lucas v. Prisoner Review Board
Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
FOIA
Citation
Case Number: 
2013 IL App (2d) 110698
Decision Date: 
Thursday, October 24, 2013
District: 
2d Dist.
Division/County: 
Lee Co.
Holding: 
Affirmed.
Justice: 
McLAREN
(Court opinion corrected 11/27/13.) Court properly dismissed with prejudice inmate's complaint against Prisoner Review Board alleging violations of FOIA. PRB properly refused to disclose clinical services report per provision of DOC regulations prohibiting disclosure of report if it includes signature of a mental health or clinical services employee of DOC, and Corrections Code which limits access of master files to authorized personnel. PRB properly refused to disclose name and address of author of letter objecting to inmates release, and stating that victim was afraid that inmate would come after her when released. Corrections Code, and DOC regulations, exempts from release any records which may subject persons to harm. (HUDSON and BIRKETT, concurring.)

U.S. v. Misleveck

Federal 7th Circuit Court
U.S. v. Misleveck
Criminal Court
Sentencing
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 13-1855
Decision Date: 
November 25, 2013
Federal District: 
W.D. Wisc.
Holding: 
Affirmed
Dist. Ct. did not err in finding that Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) applied to defendant’s sentence on unlawful possession of firearm charge, where said finding was based in part on defendant’s prior Wisc. “arson of property other than building” conviction that concerned defendant’s setting fire to car that he had stolen. Said Wisc. conviction qualified as “violent felony” for purposes of ACCA since arson under Wisc. statute involved intentional or malicious burning of property and required showing that defendant’s use of fire had practical certainty of causing harmful act.

U.S. v. Starko

Federal 7th Circuit Court
U.S. v. Starko
Criminal Court
Sentencing
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 13-1217
Decision Date: 
November 25, 2013
Federal District: 
S.D. Ill.
Holding: 
Affirmed
Dist. Ct. did not err in sentencing defendant to 360-month term of incarceration on two counts of production of child pornography involving five-year-old girl. While defendant argued that Dist. Ct. had failed to address his argument that lower sentence was mandated in light of fact that he was mentally ill, record demonstrated that Dist. Ct. adequately addressed said argument, where Dist. Ct. directly questioned defendant about his mental health history and specifically noted that it had difficult time accepting defendant’s argument that placed blame for his actions on type of medication he was taking and medication he had not taken. Moreover, record supported Dist. Ct.’s finding that there was lack of causal connection between defendant’s misconduct and his mental condition.