People v. Lara
408 Ill. App. 3d 732
Ill. App. Ct.2011Background
- Lara convicted of two counts of predatory criminal sexual assault (PCSA) for touching an eight-year-old girl, J.O., with his finger inside her vagina.
- State conceded J.O.'s out-of-court statements were admitted under 115-10; corpus delicti issue centers on corroboration of confession.
- J.O. provided two incidents involving touching; Paraday noted statements claimed contact outside vagina.
- Lara testified he did not touch J.O. and alleged epilepsy/medical issues at arrest.
- Court vacated PCSA convictions, reduced to aggravated criminal sexual abuse (ACSA) and remanded for sentencing on ACSA charges.
- Appellate court maintained evidence supported ACSA but failed to corroborate the penetration element for PCSA.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether out-of-court statements were reliable under 115-10 | State: statements reliable; admission proper | Lara: reliability under 115-10 questionable | Admissible under 115-10; no abuse of discretion |
| Whether Rule 431(b) admonitions were required | State: plain-error review governs | Rule 431(b) not fully followed | No plain-error reversal; error not fundamental to fairness |
| Corpus delicti for PCSA vs ACSA | Corroboration for all elements of PCSA required | Corroboration need not prove every element if close relation exists | Corroboration insufficient for penetration element; PCSA vacated and reduced to ACSA |
| Whether the jury should have been instructed under 115-10(c) | 115-10(c) instruction required | Failure to instruct not plain error given other evidence | No reversible plain error; instruction not required given circumstances |
| Whether reduced convictions to ACSA was appropriate | Proceedings support ACSA as lesser-included offense | Trial court should have allowed recovery on ACSA earlier | Rule 615(b)(3) reduction to two ACSA convictions; remand for sentencing on ACSA |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Sargent, 239 Ill.2d 166 (2010) (corroboration required for each offense when confession covers multiple acts)
- People v. Dalton, 91 Ill.2d 22 (1982) (corpus delicti requires evidence aliunde confession; age immutability exception)
- People v. Furby, 138 Ill.2d 434 (1990) (corroboration rule allows evidence tending to show commission of offense, not necessarily every element)
- People v. Willingham, 89 Ill.2d 352 (1982) (corroboration rule discussed in context of admissibility of confessions)
- People v. Salinas, 347 Ill.App.3d 867 (2004) (disfavored if used to broaden corroboration beyond specific offense; nuanced debate in corroboration doctrine)
- Simpkins, 297 Ill.App.3d 668 (1998) (reliability factors for child statements under 115-10)