People v. Stock
2023 IL App (1st) 231753
Ill. App. Ct.2023Background
- Defendant Kiel Stock was charged with aggravated battery/discharge of a firearm after discharging a gun during a domestic dispute in his home, injuring his wife.
- The incident occurred when Stock’s wife returned to their home with friends to collect belongings; Stock became agitated, retrieved a handgun, and fired a shot that injured his wife.
- At the pretrial hearing, the State petitioned for pretrial detention under Illinois’s new Pretrial Fairness Act (eliminating cash bail and presuming pretrial release eligibility), arguing that no conditions could mitigate the threat Stock posed.
- Defense counsel highlighted Stock’s lack of criminal history, stable employment, community ties, and suggested home confinement or GPS monitoring, arguing he believed no one was present when he fired.
- The trial court granted detention, writing only, "The defendant shot a firearm at the complaining witness," without a detailed explanation regarding why less restrictive measures wouldn’t mitigate any threat.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether proof was evident or presumption great that Stock committed a detainable offense | State proffered facts showing aggravated battery/discharge of firearm, a detainable offense | Stock questioned details, but did not dispute the sufficiency for this stage | Proof sufficient; State met burden |
| Whether Stock posed a real and present threat to the safety of any person or the community | State argued firearm discharge during domestic dispute showed clear threat | Stock argued he did not intend harm, pointed to lack of past violence | State met burden; threat established |
| Whether no conditions could mitigate the real and present threat to safety | State asserted, but did not evidence, that no conditions would suffice | Stock pointed to alternatives like home confinement, no prior convictions | State failed to meet burden; detention order was error |
| Adequacy of trial court’s explanation for denying pretrial release | State accepted court’s brief explanation | Stock argued the order lacked statutorily-required detail | Explanation insufficient; remand required |
Key Cases Cited
- In re C.N., 196 Ill. 2d 181 (Ill. 2001) (manifest weight of the evidence standard for reviewing clear and convincing findings)
- People v. Deleon, 227 Ill. 2d 322 (Ill. 2008) (defines when a finding is against the manifest weight of the evidence)
- People v. Ramirez, 2023 IL 128123 (Ill. 2023) (statutory interpretation focuses on plain language)
- Best v. Best, 223 Ill. 2d 342 (Ill. 2006) (review of trial court findings upon evidentiary hearing)