2022 IL App (1st) 210762
Ill. App. Ct.2022Background
- Darrell Ballard was arrested Nov. 20, 2018, for attempted aggravated arson and attempted first-degree murder; held in custody and appointed a public defender.
- Multiple continuances by agreement occurred through early 2020; counsel changes occurred in March 2020.
- Beginning March 2020 the Illinois Supreme Court and Cook County chief judge issued COVID‑19 emergency orders authorizing trial continuances and stating delays would not be attributable to State or defendant for purposes of the 120‑day speedy‑trial statute.
- Ballard requested bond (May 4, 2020), remained in custody, demanded trial Nov. 13, 2020, and filed pro se speedy‑trial motions; the circuit court repeatedly denied dismissal motions citing the supreme court orders.
- Trial commenced May 10, 2021; jury convicted Ballard of attempted aggravated arson (acquitted on attempted murder); Ballard appealed, challenging (1) the constitutionality of the COVID‑19 orders (separation of powers and federal claims) and (2) a statutory speedy‑trial violation (120‑day rule).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Illinois Supreme Court COVID‑19 orders tolled the 120‑day speedy‑trial statute and were constitutional under state separation‑of‑powers doctrine | State: orders were within the Supreme Court’s procedural/administrative authority and thus valid; defendant forfeited federal constitutional claims | Ballard: orders usurped legislative power and violated separation of powers (and federal Sixth/Fourteenth Amendment) | Court: orders valid under Illinois Constitution (Kunkel); federal claims waived for inadequate briefing; tolling was proper |
| Whether Ballard’s detention exceeded the 120‑day statutory speedy‑trial period | State: excluding tolled periods under the court’s COVID orders, Ballard’s time in custody did not exceed 120 days | Ballard: from his trial demand (Nov. 13, 2020) to trial (May 10, 2021) he was held ~178 additional days, totaling 222 days, violating 120‑day limit | Court: excluding periods tolled by the valid COVID orders, only 44 days counted toward the 120‑day period; no statutory speedy‑trial violation |
Key Cases Cited
- Kunkel v. Walton, 179 Ill. 2d 519 (Ill. 1997) (explains overlap of branches and primary judicial authority over court procedure and rules)
- People v. Cordell, 223 Ill. 2d 380 (Ill. 2006) (recognizes both constitutional and statutory speedy‑trial rights)
- People v. Kliner, 185 Ill. 2d 81 (Ill. 1998) (sets forth standard of review for speedy‑trial questions)
- People v. Herron, 215 Ill. 2d 167 (Ill. 2005) (describes plain‑error review exceptions for unpreserved claims)
- People v. Piatkowski, 225 Ill. 2d 551 (Ill. 2007) (clarifies plain‑error two‑step analysis and need to identify clear or obvious error)