People v. Murray
155 N.E.3d 412
Ill.2020Background
- On April 21, 2013, after a confrontation at a Belvidere gas station, Marco Hernandez shot and killed Richard Herman; defendant Deontae Murray was present and later indicted alongside Hernandez. Murray was charged with first‑degree murder and unlawful possession of a firearm by a street gang member.
- Police detective/gang expert David Dammon testified extensively about gang structure, his experience, gang databases, and opined that the Latin Kings are a "street gang." He did not identify specific offenses, dates, or the two discrete crimes required by statute to show a "course or pattern of criminal activity."
- The State played cell‑phone videos showing gang signs and graffiti; Murray admitted prior membership in the Latin Kings but testified he was no longer a member at trial.
- A jury convicted Murray of murder, aggravated unlawful use of a weapon (merged), and unlawful possession of a firearm by a street gang member; the appellate court affirmed the gang‑possession conviction.
- The Illinois Supreme Court held the evidence insufficient to prove the statutory definition of "streetgang" (specifically the statutory "course or pattern of criminal activity" element), vacated the gang‑possession conviction, reversed the appellate decision on that count, and remanded for resentencing on the merged weapon count.
Issues
| Issue | State's Argument | Murray's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the State proved the Latin Kings are a "streetgang" under the Illinois Streetgang Terrorism Omnibus Prevention Act (i.e., showed a "course or pattern of criminal activity" as statutorily defined). | Expert opinion that the Latin Kings are a street gang plus general gang testimony and video evidence sufficed; no requirement to prove specific historical crimes. | Dammon’s opinion alone was insufficient because the Act requires proof of two or more gang‑related criminal offenses within specified time limits; expert failed to identify specific crimes/dates. | Held for Murray: State failed to prove the statutory "course or pattern of criminal activity"; expert opinion without specific crime evidence was insufficient. |
| Whether an expert may establish the street‑gang element without testifying to the underlying specific offenses or dates (interaction of Ill. R. Evid. 705 / Wilson). | Expert opinion on ultimate issue can satisfy the element; burden shifts to defense to cross‑examine underlying bases. | The State bears the burden to prove every element beyond a reasonable doubt; Rule 705 does not permit the State to omit the facts necessary to prove an element and force the defendant to fill the gap by cross‑examination. | Held for Murray: State must present evidence satisfying statutory elements; omission of the required crime evidence cannot be cured simply because an expert opined the group is a gang. |
| Whether Murray’s own charged/convicted offenses at trial could supply the required two gang‑related offenses for the "course or pattern." | The murder and weapon offenses were "gang‑related" and could fulfill the statute’s requirements. | A defendant’s charged crimes at the time of trial cannot be used to prove an element of one of those same charged offenses; they were not proved as gang‑related separate offenses when presented. | Held for Murray: Defendant’s charged crimes cannot be used to satisfy the statutory element at the time of trial. |
| Admissibility/reliability of gang database evidence (and the court taking judicial notice of problems with CPD gang database). | Gang databases and LEADS are routinely relied upon by gang experts and may support an expert’s opinion. | The court should require proof tying database or other records to the statutory crimes; database reliability issues undermine reliance absent corroboration. | Held for Murray: Court noted reliability concerns (judicial notice of CPD IG report) and emphasized that expert references to databases without connecting specific crimes/dates did not meet the statutory burden. |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
- People v. Brown, 2013 IL 114196 (State must prove every element beyond a reasonable doubt)
- People v. Howery, 178 Ill. 2d 1 (burden remains on the State throughout trial)
- People v. Mosby, 25 Ill. 2d 400 (essential elements cannot be inferred and must be established)
- Wilson v. Clark, 84 Ill. 2d 186 (expert may base opinion on facts not in evidence; interplay of Rules 703/705)
- People v. Jamesson, 329 Ill. App. 3d 446 (appellate precedent that previously allowed gang experts to opine without specific dates/incidents — limited and overruled here)
- People v. Wright, 2017 IL 119561 (distinguished — factual proof of physical items vs. statutory elements requiring discrete proven offenses)