People v. Black
975 N.E.2d 706
Ill. App. Ct.2012Background
- Black was convicted after a bench trial of being an armed habitual criminal and sentenced to seven years.
- On Oct. 17, 2009, Chicago police executed a search at 8739 S. Racine; Black was present, he ran into a bedroom with a handgun, and he threw the gun out the window; the gun was recovered.
- Police found nine bags of crack cocaine, two bundles of money, and a Comcast bill in Black's name at the apartment; prior convictions for aggravated robbery (1999) and unlawful use of a weapon by a felon (2006) were introduced.
- The trial court merged the unlawful use of a weapon charges into the armed habitual criminal offense and imposed seven years’ imprisonment and $660 in fines, fees, and costs.
- On appeal, Black challenged (1) the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, (2) ex post facto applicability, and (3) the fines, fees, and costs; the appellate court affirmed the conviction and sentence but reduced the fines by $335.
- The appellate court ultimately modified the judgment to reduce fines, fees, and costs by $335.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the armed habitual criminal statute violate the Second Amendment? | Black contends the statute infringes the right to bear arms. | The People argue the statute is a lawful regulation providing public safety. | No violation; statute passes intermediate scrutiny and serves a substantial government interest. |
| Does applying the statute violate ex post facto prohibitions? | Black argues prior offenses before enactment were used as elements. | Statute punishes the new offense of possessing a firearm in combination with prior convictions. | No ex post facto violation; statute creates a new offense and provides fair warning. |
| Should fines, fees, and costs be reduced by $335? | Requests reduction of specific fines and credits for time served. | (No separate argument stated; the State agrees on reduction.) | Yes; modify judgment to reduce fines, fees, and costs by $335. |
Key Cases Cited
- Heller v. District of Columbia, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) (Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms with limitations)
- McDonald v. City of Chicago, 130 S. Ct. 3020 (2010) (Incorporation of Second Amendment; prohibitions on felon possession permissible)
- Wilson v. County of Cook, 2012 IL 112026 (2012) (Interprets Second Amendment standards in Illinois context)
- Ross v. People, 407 Ill. App. 3d 931 (2011) (Armed habitual criminal statute upheld under intermediate scrutiny)
- People v. Davis, 405 Ill. App. 3d 585 (2010) (Supports intermediate scrutiny and government interest in firearm regulation)
- People v. Leonard, 391 Ill. App. 3d 926 (2009) (Ex post facto analysis; statute creates new offense, not sentencing)
- People v. Bailey, 396 Ill. App. 3d 459 (2009) (Ex post facto analysis; Leonard followed; prior convictions as elements)
- People v. Dunigan, 165 Ill. 2d 235 (1995) (Habitual Criminal Act; sentencing enhancement distinction)
- People v. Levin, 157 Ill. 2d 138 (1993) (Habitual Criminal Act sentencing enhancement)