People v. Lee
968 N.E.2d 1204
Ill. App. Ct.2012Background
- January 3–4, 2000: elderly Stofer brothers robbed, beaten, and burned to death in Chicago; defendant arrested January 4, 2000; inculpatory statements made January 6; charged with multiple counts including 12 counts of first-degree murder; extensive suppression/attenuation proceedings ensued.”
- October 2000–October 2006: trial court quashed arrest, attenuated determination, and appellate remand led to suppression hearing; trial court initially found attenuation, reversed, and on remand found no attenuation; remand decision reversed again determining probable cause existed.”
- January 2009–May 2010: suppression issues heard; trial court denied amended motion to suppress; jury trial conducted in May 2010; autopsy evidence and confessions admitted; verdict: first-degree murder, robbery, arson, residential burglary, and home invasion; life sentence with concurrent terms.”
- Autopsies performed by Dr. Mileusnic; Dr. McElligott testified at trial; autopsy reports admitted via business records; defendant challenges confrontation rights with Mileusnic and argues testimonial hearsay.
- On appeal, issues include suppression of statement, confrontation rights, and one-act, one-crime mittimus corrections; reviewing court affirms conviction and corrects mittimus.
- Mittimus corrected to reflect only two intentional first-degree murder convictions (counts I and III) and related sentences; ancillary reductions in arson, residential burglary, home invasion, and robbery counts per one-act, one-crime rules.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Voluntariness of inculpatory statement | Lee argues coercion and promises compromised voluntariness | Lee contends leniency promise and abuse rendered statement involuntary | Statement voluntary; denial of suppress motion affirmed |
| Confrontation rights regarding autopsy evidence | State argues autopsy reports are non-testimonial business records | Lee asserts confrontation rights violated by lack of Mileusnic testimony | Not violate confrontation; autopsy reports fall within business records; no Crawford violation; plain error not shown |
| One-act, one-crime mittimus corrections | State concedes multiple murders, but convictions should reflect two decedents | Lee seeks minimal murder convictions and removal of duplicative counts | Mittimus corrected: two intentional first-degree murders (counts I and III); vacate other murder counts; one arson, one residential burglary, one home invasion, and one robbery conviction/sentence preserved |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Rivera, 409 Ill.App.3d 122 (2011) (deference to trial court on suppression findings; evidentiary standard for voluntariness)
- People v. Harris, 389 Ill.App.3d 107 (2009) (evidence may be considered from trial and pretrial proceedings in suppression)
- People v. Polk, 407 Ill.App.3d 80 (2010) (confession voluntariness burden by preponderance of the evidence)
- People v. Gilliam, 172 Ill.2d 484 (1996) (totality of circumstances in voluntariness of confession)
- People v. Ball, 322 Ill.App.3d 521 (2001) (factors for voluntariness incl. manipulation/promises)
- People v. Buie, 238 Ill.App.3d 260 (1992) (credibility determinations reside with trier of fact)
- Moore v. Illinois, 378 Ill.App.3d 41 (2007) (autopsy reports as business records; non-testimonial)
- People v. Leach, 405 Ill.App.3d 297 (2010) (autopsy data not testimonial; public records exception)
- Bullcoming v. New Mexico, 131 S. Ct. 2705 (2011) (distinguishable surrogate testimony; confrontation concerns)
- People v. Artis, 232 Ill.2d 156 (2009) (one-act, one-crime review for potential surplus convictions)
- People v. Price, 2011 IL App (4th) 100311 (2011) (distinguishing McLaurin; home invasion vs residential burglary)
- People v. Hill, 402 Ill.App.3d 920 (2010) (mittimus correction without remand)
- People v. King, 66 Ill.2d 551 (1977) (one-act, one-crime principle)