Criminal Law

People v. Calhoun

People v. Calhoun
Illinois Appellate Court
Criminal Court
Sentencing
Verdicts
Citation
Case Number: 
No.1-07-0266
Decision Date: 
Friday, September 10, 2010
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co., 5th Div.
Holding: 
Affirmed in part and reversed and remanded in part; mittimus corrected.
Justice: 
JOSEPH GORDON
Defendant was convicted of kidnaping and first degree murder, and sentenced to 7 years and 60 years imprisonment, to be served consecutively. Court improperly failed to recognize the full nature and extent of the egregious provocation, in that Defendant believed that the victim, an adult, had raped her infant daughter; victim had admitted his crime to Defendant; and her neighbor told Defendant that victim had done the same thing to her baby. Serious provocation arising from substantial physical injury or assault extends to injuries to family members, including children. Trial court was not required to sua sponte tender separate verdict forms to the jury, and failure to do so was not error. No ineffective assistance of counsel in defense counsel having failed to request separate verdict forms; counsel may have made tactical decision as part of a reasonable trial strategy, in assessing that giving special verdict forms would make it easier for jury to find Defendant guilty of felony murder. (McBRIDE and ROBERT GORDON, concurring.)

People ex rel. Dept. of Corrections v. Hawkins

Illinois Supreme Court PLAs
People ex rel. Dept. of Corrections v. Hawkins
Criminal Court
Prisoners
Citation
PLA issue Date: 
September 29, 2010
Docket Number: 
No. 110792
District: 
3rd Dist.
This case presents question as to whether trial court properly entered judgment in favor of Dept. of Corrections in action seeking to recover $456,000 in costs associated with defendant's incarceration. Appellate Court, in affirming trial court, found that Dept. could obtain judgment against inmate for entire cost of his incarceration under section 3-7-6 of Code of Corrections even where inmate's assets were insufficient to satisfy said judgment and consisted of only his prison wages. Inmate also argued in his petition for leave to appeal that Dept. could not attach his inmate account where Dept. had previously offset 3 percent of his wages to account for his housing costs.

People v. Lee

Illinois Supreme Court PLAs
Criminal Court
Sentencing
Citation
PLA issue Date: 
September 29, 2010
Docket Number: 
No. 110702
District: 
1st Dist. Rule 23 Order
This case presents question as to whether trial court properly imposed $10 fee for Arrestee's Medical Costs Fund even though there was no evidence that defendant incurred any medical costs during his time in custody. Appellate Court found that fee applied to all convicted defendant's regardless of whether they incurred specific medical costs.

People v. Jackson

Illinois Supreme Court PLAs
Criminal Court
Sentencing
Citation
PLA issue Date: 
September 29, 2010
Docket Number: 
No. 110615
District: 
1st Dist. Rule 23 Order.
This case presents question as to whether trial court properly imposed $10 fee for Arrestee's Medical Costs Fund, even though there was no evidence that defendant incurred any medical costs during his time in custody. Appellate Court found that fee applied to all convicted defendants regardless of whether they incurred specific medical costs, and that said Fund acted as medical insurance for incarcerated defendants.

People v. Marshall

Illinois Supreme Court PLAs
People v. Marshall
Criminal Court
Sentencing
Citation
PLA issue Date: 
September 29, 2010
Docket Number: 
No. 110765
District: 
3rd Dist.
This case presents question as to whether, as part of defendant's sentence on murder charge, trial court appropriately assessed defendant DNA analysis fee of $200. While defendant argued that instant fee should be vacated since trial court was without authority to order him to submit DNA sample or pay fee where defendant's DNA sample was already on file, Appellate Court found fee was appropriate since defendant had provided new DNA sample, and that legislature's intent was to require payment of fee without consideration as to whether defendant's DNA sample was already on file.

People v. Gutman

Illinois Supreme Court PLAs
People v. Gutman
Criminal Court
Money Laundering
Citation
PLA issue Date: 
September 29, 2010
Docket Number: 
No. 110338
District: 
1st Dist.
This case presents question as to whether defendant's conviction on money laundering charge under section 29B-1(a),(b)(4) of Criminal Code was proper where trial court considered evidence of defendant's gross receipts of certain criminal activities instead of any net profits from said activities to find her guilty of said charge. Appellate Court, in reversing defendant's conviction, found that State must prove that defendant laundered net proceeds of her criminal activities.

People v. Taylor

Illinois Supreme Court PLAs
People v. Taylor
Criminal Court
Evidence
Citation
PLA issue Date: 
September 29, 2010
Docket Number: 
No. 110067
District: 
2nd Dist.
This case presents question as to whether trial court, in prosecution on theft charge, properly admitted surveillance-type videotape where State attempted to use silent-witness approach to establish requisite foundation for tape's admission. Appellate Court, in reversing trial court, found that admission of tape was not proper where: (1) instant tape had obvious jump sections; (2) no witness testified that recording was true and accurate portrayal of what witness had seen or heard; and (3) State failed to provide any evidence to exclude possibility that recording was product of editing.

People v. Villa

Illinois Supreme Court PLAs
People v. Villa
Criminal Court
Evidence
Citation
PLA issue Date: 
September 29, 2010
Docket Number: 
No. 110777
District: 
2nd Dist.
This case presents question as to whether in trial on charge of aggravated battery trial court properly allowed state to impeach defendant with prior delinquency adjudication for burglary. Appellate Court found that said impeachment was permissible under section 5-150(1)(c) of Juvenile Court Act, that legislature had power to modify contrary rule set forth in Montgomery, and that use of said adjudication was proper to counter defendant's testimony that he had never dealt with police questioning prior to instant offense.

People v. Hammond

Illinois Supreme Court PLAs
People v. Hammond
Criminal Court
Probation
Citation
PLA issue Date: 
September 29, 2010
Docket Number: 
No. 110044
District: 
4th Dist.
This case presents question as to whether section 5-6-4(i) of Code of Corrections, which establishes alternative intermediate sanctions as way of avoiding potential revocation of probation for certain technical, non-felonious violations of probation, is constitutional. Trial court granted defendants' motions to dismiss state's petitions for revocation of probation based on finding that defendants had accepted and completed sanctions that their probation officers had proposed, and Appellate Court rejected State's argument that section 5-6-4(i) was unconstitutional as undue infringement on State's Attorney's function of prosecuting probation violations, as well as trial court's authority over probation proceedings.

People v. Alberty

Illinois Supreme Court PLAs
Criminal Court
Probation
Citation
PLA issue Date: 
September 29, 2010
Docket Number: 
No. 110705
District: 
1st Dist. Rule 23 Order.
This case presents question as to whether trial court properly revoked defendant's probation where instant petition to revoke probation that alleged violation of probation was generated by defendant's probation officer. Appellate Court rejected defendant's claim that only State's Attorney could file instant petition to revoke probation where, according to defendant, said petition constituted commencement of criminal proceeding.