People v. Jones
2017 IL App (1st) 143718
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2017Background
- Kevin Jones was charged after Robbins police arrested him on an outstanding warrant on Jan 2, 2013; officers learned he was a registered sex offender and that he had not reported since a June 29, 2012 SORA registration.
- At the June 29, 2012 registration Jones indicated he was homeless and initialed and signed a form acknowledging a weekly reporting duty; the form was admitted at trial.
- The State introduced Jones’s 1979 conviction for attempted rape (and officers’ testimony about his 2012 registration), but did not introduce DOC records or other evidence showing tolling of Jones’s statutory 10-year registration period.
- Jones moved for a directed verdict at trial (denied), was convicted by a bench trial of failing to report weekly under SORA and sentenced to three years’ imprisonment; he appealed on sufficiency-of-evidence grounds.
- The appellate court reviewed whether the State proved (1) Jones was still required to register in 2013 (i.e., the 10-year period had not expired or had been tolled) and (2) Jones lacked a fixed residence; it reversed because the State failed to prove the essential element that Jones remained subject to SORA at the time of the offense.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Jones was required to register under SORA in Jan 2013 (i.e., 10-year period still running/tolled) | Jones’s 10-year duty was tolled by subsequent confinements and convictions, so he remained subject to SORA in 2012–2013 | The State did not prove tolled registration; the original 10-year obligation expired long ago and no tolling evidence was presented | Reversed — State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Jones was still required to register in Jan 2013; evidence insufficient on this element |
| Whether the State proved Jones lacked a fixed residence and thus had a weekly reporting duty | The SORA registration form and officers’ testimony showing Jones said he was homeless support that he lacked a fixed residence | Testimony and form alone are insufficient absent corroborating evidence; State failed to prove the registration duty in any event | Not addressed on the merits because reversal was based on failure to prove the duty to register |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Brown, 2013 IL 114196 (discusses due process and proof beyond a reasonable doubt)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for sufficiency of the evidence review)
- People v. Cunningham, 212 Ill. 2d 274 (standard for viewing evidence in light most favorable to prosecution)
- People v. Lloyd, 2013 IL 113510 (standard for reasonable inferences and reversal threshold)
- People v. Molnar, 222 Ill. 2d 495 (purpose of SORA to provide law enforcement ready access to offender information)
- People v. Adams, 144 Ill. 2d 381 (context on SORA’s objectives)
- People v. Woods, 214 Ill. 2d 455 (sufficiency challenges are not forfeited and may be raised on direct appeal)