People v. Carter
2016 IL App (3d) 140196
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2016Background
- Defendant Cornelius D. Carter was tried for aggravated battery with a firearm for shooting Kameron Angel on August 30, 2010; victim identified Carter in a photo lineup and suffered lasting injuries.
- While awaiting trial in county jail in 2013, jail personnel discovered contraband (hacksaw blades, cut window, cell phone items, taped socket) and recordings of Carter discussing obtaining items that could cut handcuffs and saying he might not make it to trial.
- The State moved in limine to admit evidence of an alleged escape attempt; the trial court allowed it but instructed the State to minimize such evidence.
- At trial the State introduced physical evidence, photographs, officer testimony, summaries of recorded calls (one call with his girlfriend was played), and other recordings (a CD was admitted but not played). The jury requested the transcript of the played visitation call during deliberations and convicted Carter.
- Carter received a 30-year sentence (to run consecutively with federal time). Postjudgment, the circuit clerk’s cost sheet assessed multiple fines and fees totaling $597; Carter challenged several assessments on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of other-crimes (escape) evidence | Evidence of attempted escape shows consciousness of guilt and is admissible; items and recordings tie Carter to a real escape plan. | Evidence was excessive, created a "trial within a trial," prejudiced the jury and should have been excluded or limited. | Affirmed: trial court did not abuse discretion; escape evidence was probative of consciousness of guilt, not unduly prejudicial, and not excessive. |
| Scope/amount of escape evidence | State minimized testimony and needed multiple links (physical contraband, recordings) to prove the escape attempt beyond speculation. | Even if some limited proof was admissible, the quantity/detail introduced was excessive and inflammatory. | Affirmed: amount did not exceed what was necessary; any error would be harmless given strong guilt evidence. |
| Challenge to fines and fees imposed by circuit clerk | State conceded remand for proper imposition but argued appellate options limited by later precedent. | Clerk improperly assessed fines after entry; some assessments are fines and/or were improperly levied or ex post facto. | In part vacated: under Castleberry appellate courts may not increase an otherwise-low judicial sentence; court vacated multiple clerk-imposed fines and the $250 DNA fee and left certain statutory fees intact; remanded for the trial court to enter modified judgment on fines/fees/costs. |
| DNA analysis fee | State implicitly argued fee proper unless defendant already in DNA index. | Carter produced official record showing he had previously submitted DNA; fee therefore improper. | Vacated $250 DNA analysis fee because defendant already had DNA in the database. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Adkins, 239 Ill. 2d 1 (2010) (other-crimes evidence admissible only if probative value not outweighed by prejudice under Rule 403)
- People v. McKown, 236 Ill. 2d 278 (2010) (harmless-error standard for admission of evidence)
- People v. Arna, 168 Ill. 2d 107 (1995) (discussion of void sentence rule prior to being abrogated)
- People v. Gaines, 88 Ill. 2d 342 (1981) (possession of means to escape admissible to show consciousness of guilt)
- People v. Gacho, 122 Ill. 2d 221 (1988) (statements indicating intent to escape admissible as consciousness of guilt)
- People v. McKibbins, 96 Ill. 2d 176 (1983) (other-crimes evidence not prejudicial where relevant and not excessive)
- People v. Bartall, 98 Ill. 2d 294 (1983) (warning against "trial within a trial" and unnecessary cumulative other-crimes evidence)
- People v. Marshall, 242 Ill. 2d 285 (2011) (trial court may order DNA analysis fee only if defendant is not already in DNA database)