People v. Carter
405 Ill. App. 3d 246
Ill. App. Ct.2010Background
- Carter was convicted of indecent solicitation of a child and received two years of sex offender probation.
- Trial involved a 2005 incident with a 13-year-old, T.W., investigated in 2005 and tried in 2008.
- T.W. testified that defendant initiated sexual acts after arriving at Payne's house; Payne observed, leading to police involvement.
- The defense presented a marijuana-delivery narrative; the State presented corroborating identification and timing evidence.
- Carter was convicted of indecent solicitation but acquitted of aggravated criminal sexual abuse; appellate issues followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Erroneous jury instructions on intent and age | People conceded the instruction was outdated and defective. | Carter contends the errors were plain error requiring reversal. | No reversible error; plain error found harmless |
| Closing argument misstatement about witness statements | State argued implied prior statements corroborated Payne's trial testimony. | Carter claimed improper bolstering of a witness without proper foundation. | Harmless error; not prejudicial given the other evidence |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel | Defense failed to raise objections and remedy faulty instructions. | Counsel was ineffective for not challenging errors earlier. | No ineffective assistance; no prejudice established |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Hudson, 228 Ill. 2d 181 (2008) (plain-error standard where not timely objected)
- People v. Herron, 215 Ill. 2d 167 (2005) (plain-error analysis and prejudice burden)
- People v. Hopp, 209 Ill. 2d 1 (2004) (harmlessness of erroneous intent instructions)
- People v. Jones, 81 Ill. 2d 1 (1989) (insufficient prejudice when intent is evident from evidence)
- People v. Deavers, 580 N.E.2d 1367 (1991) (adult in presence of a child as probative of state of mind)