Criminal Law

U.S. v. Aviles-Solarzano

Federal 7th Circuit Court
Criminal Court
Sentencing
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 09-3992
Decision Date: 
October 13, 2010
Federal District: 
N.D. Ill., E. Div.
Holding: 
Affirmed
Dist. Ct. did not err in sentencing defendant to 70-month term of incarceration on charge of illegal reentry into U.S. after having been deported where said sentence was based in part on finding that defendant's prior Ill. conviction for aggravated battery was crime of violence within meaning of section 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) of USSG. Dist. Ct. could properly make determination that Ill. conviction qualified as crime of violence based upon summary of indictment for said offense contained in presentence investigation report where defense counsel in instant sentence proceeding did not object to accuracy of summary. Moreover, while summary might be inaccurate, defendant's only remedy at this juncture was to file post-conviction proceeding.

People v. Thompson

Illinois Appellate Court
Criminal Court
Guilty Pleas
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 3-09-0019
Decision Date: 
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
District: 
3d Dist.
Division/County: 
Peoria Co.
Holding: 
Affirmed.
Justice: 
CARTER
Defendant was convicted of armed robbery after bench trial, and sentenced to 26 years imprisonment. Defendant's stipulated bench trial was not tantamount to a guilty plea; defense counsel did not stipulate that the facts were sufficient for a guilty finding, but stipulated only that if the case went to trial the State could present the evidence it had represented to the court, and preserved the issue of constitutionality of the sentencing enhancement. Defendant was allowed to preserve the issue he sought for appeal, yet received the benefit of a plea proceeding with dismissal of three of the four charges against him; thus, remand for compliance with Supreme Court Rules as to guilty pleas is not required. (LYTTON and O'BRIEN, concurring.)

People v. Clark

Illinois Appellate Court
Criminal Court
DUI
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 2-08-0993
Decision Date: 
Thursday, September 16, 2010
District: 
2d Dist.
Division/County: 
Kane Co.
Holding: 
Affirmed as modified; remanded for resentencing.
Justice: 
McLAREN
(Court opinion corrected 10/5/10.) Defendant was convicted of Class X felony DUI, based on having six or more prior DUI convictions, and was sentenced to 80 months in prison.Law which raised sixth or subsequent DUI from Class 2 felony to Class X felony was implicitly repealed by other laws; thus, his DUI conviction must be reduced to Class 1 felony, under principle of lenity and given irreconcilable conflicts of laws. (HUTCHINSON and JORGENSEN, concurring.)

U.S. v. Shamah

Federal 7th Circuit Court
Criminal Court
RICO
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 09-2767
Decision Date: 
October 12, 2010
Federal District: 
N.D. Ill., E. Div.
Holding: 
Affirmed
Record contains sufficient evidence to support defendant's conviction on charge of conspiracy to violate RICO arising out of scheme by defendant-police officer and another officer to retain money and drugs seized from suspected drug dealers during traffic stops and searches of premises and to plant drugs on suspects in order to establish probable cause for said arrests. Ct. rejected defendant's argument that govt. failed to prove conduct element, as contained in section 1962(c) of RICO, even though defendant was low-ranking police officer, after holding that defendant and his partners were operators for purposes of RICO since defendant had power to control police dept.'s affairs and manipulated his power by transforming legitimate police functions into arms of his illegal endeavors. Ct. further found that defendant agreed to participate in at least two predicate RICO acts so as to establish pattern of racketeering activity where jury could properly conclude that several seizures of money and drugs from alleged drug suspects were robberies that were performed via use of force, as opposed to thefts from police evidence inventory.

U.S. v. Fife

Federal 7th Circuit Court
Criminal Court
Sentencing
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 09-2310
Decision Date: 
October 12, 2010
Federal District: 
E.D. Wisc.
Holding: 
Affirmed
Dist. Ct. erred in sentencing defendant to 48-month term of incarceration on firearms charge, after improperly rejecting govt. argument that defendant should have been sentenced to minimum term of 15 years as armed career offender. Defendant had previously been sentenced as armed career offender based in part on Ill. armed violence conviction, and said conviction still qualified as violent offense where said offence involved defendant's possession of cocaine with intent to deliver while armed with weapon since said offense involved serious potential risk of physical injury.

People v. Price

Illinois Appellate Court
Criminal Court
Cross-Examination
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 1-07-2223
Decision Date: 
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co., 2d Div.
Holding: 
Reversed and remanded.
Justice: 
THEIS
Defendant was convicted, after bench trial, of possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver within 1000 feet of a park. Court erred in precluding cross-examination as to the police officer's surveillance location. The surveillance privilege, similar to an informant's privilege, may be asserted at trial to prevent disclosure of a surveillance point, but the privilege is limited by procedural safeguards that protect a defendant's sixth amendment right to confront witnesses. Court's precluding of cross-examination prevented a comprehensive assessment of the reliability of the officer's eyewitness testimony, as no adequate record was developed as to the required factors for assessing applicability of the privilege. Defendant made showing that the evidence was closely balanced.(CUNNINGHAM and HOFFMAN, concurring.)

U.S. v. Albiola

Federal 7th Circuit Court
Criminal Court
Evidence
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 08-3306
Decision Date: 
October 8, 2010
Federal District: 
N.D. Ill., E. Div.
Holding: 
Affirmed
In prosecution on charge of attempting to possess with intent to distribute drugs, Dist. Ct. did not err in admitting evidence of four false mailing labels used by defendant in Express Mail packages similar to one found by police officials that contained drugs hidden in coffee maker that formed basis of instant charged offense. Although Dist. Ct. erred in finding that other false mailing labels constituted direct evidence of charged offense, said evidence was admissible under Rule 404(b) to establish lack of mistake, as well as evidence of defendant's intentional act of concealment.

People v. Griffith

Illinois Appellate Court
Criminal Court
Double Jeopardy
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 1-09-1001
Decision Date: 
Thursday, September 30, 2010
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co.
Holding: 
Affirmed.
Justice: 
GARCIA
Defendant's conviction for murder had been affirmed, despite intentional and systematic misconduct of the prosecutor during trial. Defendant's postconviction petition claiming numerous instances of ineffective assistance of counsel was summarily dismissed. Federal district court granted his petition for writ of habeas corpus. A new trial protects the Defendant's constitutional right to a fair trial; no interests protected by the double jeopardy clause are at stake. The interests behind the double jeopardy clause do not bar a retrial under the circumstances. The only relief the Defendant can claim, even considering egregious prosecutorial misconduct, is a new trial. (CAHILL and McBRIDE, concurring.)

People v. Sanders

Illinois Supreme Court
Criminal Court
Voir Dire
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 109014
Decision Date: 
Thursday, October 7, 2010
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co.
Holding: 
Appellate court affirmed.
Justice: 
GARMAN
Defendant was convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to 40 years in prison. At 1994 trial the State argued that the shooting was gang related. Defendant filed a postconviction petition 7 years later, relying on 2000 Supreme Court decision, People v. Strain, holding that the judge must ask potential jurors about any biases they have against gangs, when gang evidence is to be integral to trial. Strain decision announced a new constitutional rule of criminal procedure, and Defendant cannot utilize it to retroactively challenge the result of his trial. (FITZGERALD, THOMAS, KILBRIDE, and KARMEIER, concurring; FREEMAN and BURKE, specially concurring.)

People v. Ramsey

Illinois Supreme Court
Criminal Court
Guilty Pleas
Death Penalty
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 105942
Decision Date: 
Thursday, October 7, 2010
District: 
3d Dist.
Division/County: 
Hancock Co.
Holding: 
Circuit court affirmed.
Justice: 
GARMAN
Defendant, age 18 at time of offense, pled guilty, upon second trial, to intentional and felony murders of two minor victims, attempted murders of three minor victims, aggravated criminal sexual assault, and home invasion. Jury found him eligible for death penalty; court sentenced him to death and imposed 60 years imprisonment on other convictions. Although prosecutor had, prior to first trial, stated that death penalty would not be sought if Defendant pled guilty, the new prosecutor later decided to seek the death penalty even if Defendant pled guilty. Original offer had expired, and the later decision by prosecutor to seek death penalty did not deny Defendant due process. No error in defense counsel not being members of Capital Litigation Trial Bar, as the 2002 rule requiring such membership for counsel in capital cases took effect after their representation began. (FITZGERALD, FREEMAN, THOMAS, KILBRIDE, KARMEIER, and BURKE, concurring.)