People v. Akins
2014 IL App (1st) 093418-B
Ill. App. Ct.2014Background
- Defendant Rasheen Akins was convicted by bench trial of four counts of AUUW and sentenced to 12 months’ probation with fines and fees totaling $300.
- This court previously affirmed the conviction in 2011 but vacated specific fees; supervisory order required reconsideration in light of Aguilar (2013 IL 112116).
- On July 16, 2008, police encountered Akins; he fled and discarded a loaded Glock handgun; he lacked a valid FOID card.
- Counts I and III concerned uncased, loaded, immediately accessible firearms outside the home and on the public way; counts II and IV involved possession without a FOID card outside the home and on the public way.
- Aguilar held that possession outside the home in the uncased, loaded, and immediately accessible form is unconstitutional as a self-defense ban; the court must apply Aguilar’s reasoning to related subsections.
- The court vacates Counts I and III under Aguilar and vacates Count II under the one-act, one-crime rule; Counts II and IV proceeds, with Counts IV remaining valid.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Are AUUW counts I and III unconstitutional post-Aguilar? | Akins argues Aguilar voids these formations of AUUW. | State contends some FOID-based provisions remain valid as severable. | Counts I and III vacated. |
| Should Counts II and IV survive after Aguilar and severability analysis? | Akins argues all FOID-based subsections are unconstitutional. | State contends FOID subsections are severable and constitutional under Henderson/Taylor. | Counts II vacated; Count IV stands. |
| Application of one-act, one-crime to remaining counts | Akins contends duplicative convictions must be vacated. | State maintains separate harms justify two convictions. | Count II vacated; Count IV remains. |
| Correctness of fines and fees after vacatons | Akins challenges several fines and fees as improper. | State concedes some fees were improper or misapplied. | Vacate $20 VCV Act fee; vacate $5 court system fee; affirm $25 court services fee; order $4 VCV Act fee. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Aguilar, 2013 IL 112116 (IL Supreme Court (2013)) (strikes down certain AUUW provisions as unconstitutional self-defense ban)
- People v. Henderson, 2013 IL App (1st) 113294 (IL Appellate Court (1st) (2013)) (severability of FOID-based provisions upheld where not inseparable from unconstitutional portion)
- People v. Taylor, 2013 IL App (1st) 110166 (IL Appellate Court (1st) (2013)) (FOID subsections not facially unconstitutional; not extended to Aguilar ruling)
- In re Samantha V., 234 Ill. 2d 359 (Ill. 2009) (guide on determining the more serious offense for one-act, one-crime)
- People v. King, 66 Ill. 2d 551 (Illinois 1977) (one-act, one-crime rule framework)
- People v. Williams, 405 Ill. App. 3d 958 (IL Appellate Court (2010)) (court services fee authority)
- People v. Jones, 397 Ill. App. 3d 651 (IL Appellate Court (2009)) (VCV Act fee alignment and corrections)