People v. Faulkner
40 N.E.3d 381
Ill. App. Ct.2015Background
- On July 14, 2012, parole officers conducted a compliance check at 5210 S. Morgan, Chicago, the first-floor unit where Faulkner lived; officers found a loaded .223-caliber assault rifle and boxes of .223 ammunition in the attic and arrested Faulkner.
- The attic was accessible via stairs from the defendant’s first-floor unit (no doors blocked access); Faulkner was alone in the unit during the check.
- Officers seized the rifle (one round in chamber, ~41 rounds in magazine) and ~43 additional rounds in a nearby box; they also found small amounts of cannabis in the living room.
- Faulkner was charged with being an armed habitual criminal (predicated on two prior felony convictions: an AUUW conviction from 2008 and a manufacture/delivery conviction from 2009) and two counts of unlawful use/possession of a weapon by a felon (UUWF).
- At bench trial, prosecution introduced certified copies of the prior convictions and presented officer testimony; defense presented testimony from Faulkner’s great-aunt (Patricia) who said others had access to the residence/attic and denied knowledge of the gun.
- The trial court convicted on all counts and sentenced Faulkner to six years. On appeal the court affirmed the UUWF convictions for possession but reversed the armed habitual criminal conviction because the AUUW predicate was void under People v. Aguilar and remanded for resentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a prior AUUW conviction (later declared unconstitutional in Aguilar) may serve as a predicate for armed habitual criminal. | State: the prior AUUW conviction was valid at the time of the possession (July 2012) so it may serve as a predicate. | Faulkner: the AUUW conviction is void under Aguilar and cannot be used as a predicate; without it the armed habitual criminal element (two prior qualifying felonies) is not met. | Reversed armed habitual criminal conviction: the AUUW predicate was based on a statute later declared unconstitutional and void ab initio, so it cannot serve as a predicate. |
| Sufficiency: whether the State proved constructive possession of the rifle/ammunition beyond a reasonable doubt. | State: circumstantial evidence (attic location accessible from Faulkner’s unit, Faulkner lived alone in the unit, the rifle was loaded/ready, and his post-arrest statements) established knowledge and exclusive control. | Faulkner: others had access to the house/attic, some possessions pre-existed his tenancy, and there were no fingerprints or direct ownership admissions. | Affirmed UUWF convictions: the court found sufficient circumstantial evidence of knowledge and immediate/exclusive control to prove constructive possession. |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (establishes standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
- Lewis v. United States, 445 U.S. 55 (discussed by parties re: effect of prior conviction status at time of later offense)
- United States v. Lee, 72 F.3d 55 (cited by State on precedent about prior-conviction status)
- United States v. Padilla, 387 F.3d 1087 (cited by State concerning effect of later vacatur on predicate conviction)