2012 IL App (1st) 102094
Ill. App. Ct.2012Background
- Police executed a March 21, 2009 search warrant at 2101 S. 12th Ave., Maywood, with ~16 officers; defendant fled to the kitchen and backyard and was detained.
- In the third bedroom, officers found three .357 ammunition rounds on a dresser, $9,286 in cash, and a bag of cannabis; the same room contained items linking the defendant to the house (probation letter, Illinois ID, photographs, and house keys).
- A loaded bluesteel .357 revolver with 6 rounds was found in a kitchen cabinet; additional ammunition (7.62 and .357) was recovered; the defendant’s statements tied him to the gun and the cash.
- The defendant told officers pre-search that they would find only money; after items were found, he said he needed a gun because of the money.
- The defense presented witnesses claiming nonresidence at the address; the trial court nonetheless found residency based on the living-room bedroom evidence and the defendant’s statements; the defendant was convicted of unlawful use of a weapon by a felon and sentenced to 3 years with boot camp recommendation; a $15,000 fine was later imposed from seized money.
- The defendant appealed challenging sufficiency of the evidence and the constitutionality of the UUW statute; the trial record included a prior felony conviction (06 CR 10848) for aggravated unlawful use of a weapon.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is there sufficient evidence to prove unlawful possession of a weapon by a felon beyond a reasonable doubt? | People contends the State proved constructive possession via residency, knowledge of the gun, and control of the premises. | Spencer argues the evidence fails to prove he knowingly possessed the gun and that residency was not established beyond a reasonable doubt. | Yes; sufficient evidence supported constructive possession beyond a reasonable doubt. |
| Is the unlawful use of a weapon statute (UUW) constitutional under the Second Amendment as applied to a felon? | Spencer argues UUW infringes the Second Amendment and is unconstitutional as applied to his nonviolent felonies. | Spencer contends the statute is unconstitutional both on its face and as applied. | UUW statute is substantially related to a significant government objective and does not violate the Second Amendment on its face or as applied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1979) (standard for assessing sufficiency of evidence)
- People v. Collins, 214 Ill.2d 206 (Ill. 2005) (sufficiency review in Illinois criminal cases)
- People v. McCarter, 339 Ill.App.3d 876 (Ill. App. 1st Dist. 2003) (constructive possession framework for firearms)
- People v. Cunningham, 309 Ill.App.3d 824 (Ill. App. 1st Dist. 1999) (residency and control as basis for constructive possession)
- Heller v. District of Columbia, 554 U.S. 570 (U.S. Supreme Court, 2008) (second amendment core rights and limits on prohibitions)
- McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. _, 130 S. Ct. 3020 (U.S. Supreme Court, 2010) (second amendment applicability to states; felon prohibitions acknowledged)
- People v. Robinson, 2011 IL App (1st) 100078 (Ill. App. 1st Dist. 2011) (intermediate scrutiny applied to UUW statute)
- People v. Davis, 408 Ill.App.3d 747 (Ill. App. 2nd Dist. 2011) (upholding UUW statute's constitutionality)
- People v. Aguilar, 408 Ill.App.3d 136 (Ill. App. 1st Dist. 2011) (constitutional scrutiny of firearm prohibitions)