2026 IL App (5th) 240889-U
Ill. App. Ct.2026Background
- After a jury trial, Lomax was convicted of armed violence and armed habitual criminal and sentenced to two concurrent 20-year prison terms. 1
- During a June 19, 2023 traffic stop, officers found a Taurus 9-millimeter firearm near where Lomax was seated and later recovered codeine from a cup he was drinking from. 2
- Before trial, the court granted Lomax's motion in limine barring reference to his mandatory supervised release status. 3
- At trial, Detective Hails inadvertently testified that he knew Lomax was on MSR supervision, and the defense later moved for a mistrial. 4
- The court denied a mistrial but immediately instructed the jury to disregard the MSR reference, and defense counsel did not object to that curative instruction. 5
- The State presented eyewitness, firearm, DNA, and stipulation evidence showing Lomax possessed the gun and had two qualifying prior felony convictions. 6
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether MSR testimony required a mistrial 7 | People argued the curative instruction cured any prejudice. | Lomax argued the barred MSR testimony was incurably prejudicial. | No abuse of discretion; curative instruction cured the brief error. 8 |
| Whether the AHC statute violates the Second Amendment 9 | People argued felons are outside Bruen's protection and AHC is constitutional. | Lomax argued AHC is facially and as applied unconstitutional. | AHC is facially constitutional and constitutional as applied. 10 |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Donoho, 204 Ill. 2d 159 (Ill. 2003) (guilt must be judged only for the charged crime 11)
- People v. Cortes, 181 Ill. 2d 249 (Ill. 1998) (other-crimes error warrants reversal only if prejudicial 12)
- People v. Bishop, 218 Ill. 2d 232 (Ill. 2006) (defines when a mistrial is proper 13)
- People v. Pinkett, 2023 IL 127223 (Ill. 2023) (mistrial requires prejudice not cured by instruction 14)
- People v. Hall, 194 Ill. 2d 305 (Ill. 2000) (curative instruction can correct improper questioning 15)
- People v. Birge, 2021 IL 125644 (Ill. 2021) (jurors are presumed to follow instructions 16)
- New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (U.S. 2022) (Second Amendment analysis asks whether regulation fits historical tradition 17)
- District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (U.S. 2008) (recognizes the right of law-abiding citizens to possess handguns 18)
- McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (U.S. 2010) (applies Second Amendment protections to the states 19)
- People v. Smith, 2025 IL App (5th) 230656 (5th Dist. 2025) (felons are not protected by the Second Amendment's plain text 20)
- People v. Stephens, 2024 IL App (5th) 220828 (5th Dist. 2024) (upholds UUWF as consistent with historical firearm regulation 21)
- People v. Travis, 2024 IL App (3d) 230113 (3d Dist. 2024) (rejects violent-versus-nonviolent felony distinction under Bruen 22)
- People v. Brooks, 2023 IL App (1st) 200435 (1st Dist. 2023) (upholds AHC as applied even with nonviolent prior felonies 23)