People v. Williams
405 Ill. App. 3d 958
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2010Background
- defendant Omar Williams convicted in a bench trial of two counts of unlawful use of a weapon by a felon and six counts of aggravated unlawful use of a weapon (AUUW); all counts merged into one AUUW conviction, five-year sentence with 308 days credit; additional costs assessed totaling $715.
- weapons found: chrome 9-mm handgun, nine bullets, and $112 total on his person; victim identified defendant in lineup and at trial; robbery acquittal due to money mismatch.
- defendant challenged the constitutionality of the statutes under the second amendment and challenged certain costs; trial record reflects arrest on August 14, 2008, in Chicago.
- the court reviewed the constitutional challenges de novo and applied a rational-basis approach consistent with prior Illinois decisions; Heller and McDonald do not render AUUW unconstitutional; however, certain costs and fees imposed were addressed.
- court remanded for mittimus modification to reflect proper cost treatment and time-credit adjustments; affirmed in part and vacated in part.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether AUUW and felon-in-possession statutes violate the Second Amendment. | Williams contends 2A invalidates those statutes. | State argued 2A does not immunize these restrictions outside the home. | 2A does not render AUUW/ felon-in-possession unconstitutional. |
| Whether the 21-year-old age restriction affects constitutionality of 720 ILCS 5/24-1.6(a)(3)(I). | Defendant argues under-21 ban should be invalid if 2A applies to non-home possession. | State asserts no fundamental right at stake for this context; 21+ rule stands. | Age-based restriction sustained; no fundamental-right violation found. |
| Whether the assessed costs/fees were properly imposed and whether presentence credit applies. | Some fees were improper or improperly labeled; some fees qualify as fines; credit due for presentence time. | Fees should be analyzed under statutory definitions; DNA fee not creditable. | Vacated certain fees as improper; allowed $50 in presentence credit for several fees; DNA fee not creditable; remanded for mittimus modification. |
| Whether the DNA analysis fee and related charges are proper and subject to presentence credit. | DNA fee should be assessed as a cost related to DNA testing. | Presentence credit may apply to fines; some cases limit DNA fee credit. | Affirmed imposition of $200 DNA analysis fee; DNA fee not subject to preincarceration credit. |
Key Cases Cited
- Heller v. District of Columbia, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) (gun possession in home protected; location limits allowed)
- McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010) (incorporation of 2A to states; home handgun rights discussed)
- Dawson v. People, 403 Ill. App. 3d 499 (2010) (AUUW constitutional under reasoning similar to Dawson)
- Austin v. People, 349 Ill. App. 3d 766 (2004) (AUUW rational basis under public-safety rationale)
- Pulley v. People, 345 Ill. App. 3d 916 (2004) (rational basis for AUUW statute)
- Sole v. People, 357 Ill. App. 3d 988 (2005) (statutory challenge to AUUW; constitutional uphold)