People v. Bogan, 77 N.E.3d 162

Defendant Antonio M. Bogan was indicted for being an armed habitual criminal and for possessing a handgun with an obliterated serial number after police searched a green Oldsmobile Cutlass registered to him and found a .40-caliber Hi-Point, a .22 Ruger, an AR-15 style rifle, magazines/ammunition, and a crossbow.
Officers observed the defendant at his apartment complex the day of the stop, detained him in a squad car, obtained consent to search his apartment, and later executed a search of the Cutlass after obtaining a warrant.
Evidence tying Bogan to the Cutlass included vehicle registration in his name, receipts and a health insurance card bearing his name found in the car, a latent fingerprint on a box of rifle ammunition matching him, and photos of the rifle on images extracted from his phone.
Bogan testified the Cutlass belonged to a friend (Anton Spencer), that he had not used the car since March 2013, and that Spencer had access to his apartment; he admitted touching a box of ammunition and seeing/sharing pictures of the rifle.
The trial court convicted Bogan on both counts and sentenced him to concurrent prison terms (30 years for armed habitual criminal, 5 years for defacing identification marks).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether State proved possession of the .40‑caliber handgun (element for both charges)	Evidence of ownership, documents in car, fingerprint on ammo, photos on phone, and placement of items in a stack in the rear floorboard support constructive possession	Owner did not have control or knowledge: car belonged to friend, receipts were months old, no key found, defendant not observed driving the car	Court: Evidence sufficient for constructive possession—defendant had control of the Cutlass and knowledge of the gun

Collins v. People, 106 Ill. 2d 237 (review standard: conviction stands if any rational trier of fact could find guilt beyond reasonable doubt)
Milka v. People, 211 Ill. 2d 150 (appellate courts do not retry defendants; defer to factfinder)
Saxon v. People, 374 Ill. App. 3d 409 (deference to trier of fact on conflicting inferences)
Nettles v. People, 23 Ill. 2d 306 (inferences regarding possession/control)
Hampton v. People, 358 Ill. App. 3d 1029 (brief/temporary control insufficient to infer knowledge)
Scott v. People, 367 Ill. App. 3d 283 (possession of exclusive key by another undermines inference of control)
Robinson v. People, 233 Ill. App. 3d 278 (control, not mere ownership, is pertinent though ownership is probative)
Sutherland v. People, 223 Ill. 2d 187 (factfinder not required to accept explanations consistent with innocence)
Brooks v. People, 187 Ill. 2d 91 (circumstantial and direct evidence have same legal effect)