2019 IL App (1st) 160705
Ill. App. Ct.2019Background
- In August 2012 police responded to a report of an armed man; officers chased and arrested Courtney Lewis after he allegedly pulled and dropped a gun while fleeing. A gun was recovered at the scene.
- Lewis was tried twice; the first trial ended in a hung jury. Between trials defense requested fingerprint testing of the gun; the trial court denied the request, finding prior handling likely destroyed any prints.
- At the second trial the State presented officer testimony and a stipulation that Lewis lacked an FOID card; the defense presented Lewis and a friend, Joshua Reed, who gave an alternate account (party, scattering from a vehicle, Lewis ran) and denied seeing a gun.
- On cross‑examination the State asked Reed and Lewis about a late‑night stripper party and whether people were drinking or using marijuana; defense objected sparingly and did not preserve a specific objection that the State failed to perfect impeachment.
- The jury convicted Lewis of aggravated unlawful use of a weapon; he was sentenced to one year in IDOC and challenged (1) the State’s impeachment questions, (2) denial to test the gun for fingerprints, and (3) certain fines and fees.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Improper/imperfect impeachment on alcohol/marijuana questions | Cross‑examination into credibility was proper and admissible; defense opened the stripper‑party topic | State improperly asked impeachment questions without offering proof of the impeaching information, creating prejudice | Forfeited for review; no clear/obvious error and no plain error; denial of relief affirmed |
| Failure to permit fingerprint testing of the gun | Testing would not be probative because prior handling at the first trial likely obliterated prints | Denial deprived defense of potentially exculpatory evidence showing Lewis’ prints were absent | Abuse of discretion not shown; trial court reasonably found testing no longer had evidentiary value |
| Fines and fees challenged as improper | Some charges constitute fees (not fines) and are not subject to presentence credit; State concedes several errors | Court Services (Sheriff) $25 charge should be treated as a fee; several local charges improper | Court corrected fines/fees, reducing judgment by $145 and vacating several charges; Court Services charge treated as a fee |
| Ineffective assistance for failing to preserve impeachment issue | N/A | Trial counsel was deficient for not objecting/preserving impeachment claim | No ineffective assistance: failure to raise an unlikely‑to‑succeed issue is not unreasonable; Strickland prejudice not shown |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes the two‑prong test for ineffective assistance)
- Arizona v. Youngblood, 488 U.S. 51 (absent bad faith, failure to preserve potentially useful evidence is not a due process violation)
- Piatkowski v. People, 225 Ill. 2d 551 (2007) (plain‑error framework discussion)
- Kliner v. People, 185 Ill. 2d 81 (1998) (scope of permissible cross‑examination on credibility)
- Patrick v. People, 233 Ill. 2d 62 (2009) (standard for abuse of discretion)
- Robertson v. People, 198 Ill. App. 3d 98 (1990) (reversal where prosecution failed to perfect impeachment)