People v. Nelson
2 N.E.3d 613
Ill. App. Ct.2014Background
- Nelson has long-standing Tourette's syndrome with obsessive-compulsive tendencies and involuntary tics.
- He made four telephone calls to Lois Miller, an elderly Sterling resident, with lewd/offensive content.
- Miller, with police, used trap-and-trace to identify the caller; Nelson’s number matched the calls.
- Dr. Martin Fields, Nelson’s psychiatrist, testified that the calls could be involuntary complex tics (coprolalia) tied to Tourette’s and that medication reduces tics.
- The trial court convicted Nelson on three counts of telephone harassment; on appeal, the appellate court reversed, focusing on voluntariness and medication lapse.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the acts of dialing and speaking were voluntary acts | State argued acts were voluntary and intentional | Nelson argued acts were involuntary due to tics | Acts were involuntary; no voluntary act proven |
| Whether failure to take medication can be a voluntary act under the statute | State asserted stopping medication was a voluntary act | No evidence Nelson knowingly stopped medication as a deliberate act | Failure to take medication is an omission, not a voluntary act; conviction reversed |
| Whether proof of mens rea was satisfied given involuntary acts | State contended intent to offend/harass could be proven despite involuntariness | Mens rea cannot be satisfied if acts are involuntary | Court did not need to reach mens rea; reversal on lack of voluntary act |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Grant, 71 Ill. 2d 551 (Ill. 1978) (voluntary act requirement; automatism defense applies to involuntary acts)
- People v. Stanciel, 153 Ill. 2d 218 (Ill. 1992) (omissions-based voluntary act analysis; statutory framework)
- Morus v. Kapusta, 339 Ill. App. 3d 483 (Ill. App. 2003) (uncontroverted expert testimony cannot be disregarded on medical issues)
- People v. Karberg, 356 Ill. App. 3d 500 (Ill. App. 2005) (each element of crime must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt; actus reus and mens rea)
- People v. Maggette, 195 Ill. 2d 336 (Ill. 2001) (standard for proving criminal liability; burden on State)