2015 IL App (4th) 130358
Ill. App. Ct.2015Background
- Defendant Anthony O'Donnell was arrested after a single-vehicle crash; he admitted drinking at a bar earlier and was charged with DUI (625 ILCS 5/11-501(a)(2)).
- Officers found the wrecked vehicle in a bean field; damage and scene photos showed passenger-side beans trampled, passenger window "busted out," driver's-side beans undisturbed, driver's-side air bag tucked into the steering wheel, and the driver's cushion and cell phone on the driver’s seat.
- Officer Rebecca Bragg testified defendant said a man named "John" drove the car after defendant let him, and that John left the scene; Bragg also testified defendant displayed signs of deception (looking away, looking down) when denying he was the driver.
- Defendant testified he was a passenger, that John—an acquaintance he could not identify later—drove and fled after the crash; his testimony contained inconsistencies about how he exited the vehicle, where he walked afterward, and when/tense of prior statements.
- The jury convicted O'Donnell of DUI; he received probation and jail time and appealed, arguing (1) improper "human lie detector" testimony from Officer Bragg and (2) the evidence was closely balanced such that the error was plain.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of officer opinion that defendant was lying ("human lie detector") | Testimony was permissible to describe officer observations and demeanor during questioning. | Such opinion testimony impermissibly comments on witness credibility and functions like a polygraph; it should be excluded. | Court: Officer's testimony that defendant's body language was a "sign of deception" was inadmissible opinion on credibility and thus erroneous. |
| Plain-error review based on closely balanced evidence | Even if error occurred, the State argues the overall evidence (photos, officers' observations, inconsistencies in defendant's story) was not closely balanced; conviction should stand. | The improper credibility testimony alone could have tipped the scales because evidence on whether defendant was driving was weak. | Court: Although the testimony was erroneous, the evidence against defendant was not so closely balanced; error did not constitute plain error. Conviction affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Henderson, 394 Ill. App. 3d 747 (2009) (police testimony identifying a defendant as deceptive serves as inadmissible "human lie detector" opinion on credibility)
- People v. Sargent, 239 Ill. 2d 166 (2010) (plain-error framework allowing review of forfeited errors when error is clear and evidence is closely balanced or error affects trial integrity)
- People v. White, 2011 IL 109689 (2011) (commonsense assessment required when evaluating first-prong plain-error claims)
- United States v. Williams, 133 F.3d 1048 (7th Cir. 1998) (observations that characterize a defendant's manner as evidence of deception are improper and prejudicial)
- People v. Adams, 2012 IL 111168 (2012) (example of assessing defendant testimony versus strong circumstantial evidence in plain-error context)