People v. Williams
2017 IL App (1st) 150795
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2017Background
- On August 14, 2010, Darius Williams (passenger) and Jeremiah Witcher (driver) were pursued after a near-collision by two off-duty police officers (Weathers and Rife) driving unmarked personal vehicles but wearing police shirts. A high-speed pursuit and attempts to pull the red car over occurred.
- During the pursuit, shots were exchanged; casings found in the red car were .25 caliber and a projectile and glass damage indicated a shot from the driver’s side into the rear seat; the officers’ duty weapons were .45 caliber and tests could not show they had been fired.
- Williams testified he fired in self-defense after one of the other cars (he believed civilian) fired at them first; he claimed he did not know the drivers were police and feared for his life.
- Officers Weathers and Rife testified they did not point or fire their weapons at the red car; both identified Williams (Rife identified both occupants) and described being fired on by the passenger.
- Williams was tried by bench trial, acquitted of attempted murder but convicted of aggravated discharge of a firearm and sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment; he appealed arguing (1) State failed to disprove self-defense, (2) trial court misstated evidence/plain error, (3) sentence excessive, and (4) sentencing-credit statutory conflict.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Williams) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the State disprove Williams’s self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt? | Officers’ testimony and physical evidence contradict Williams; no evidence officers fired or pointed weapons so self-defense fails. | Williams says at least one officer fired (per his testimony), or that officers’ aggressive driving and apparent armament justified shooting. | Held: State disproved self-defense. Credibility of officers and physical evidence ( .25 casings, absence of .45 evidence) negated self-defense. |
| Did trial court commit plain error by misstating evidence when explaining verdict? | Court’s credibility finding was supported by record; any misstatement was minor and did not undermine decision. | Court misstated that both officers missed yet two defendants hit a target, which Williams says misapprehended crucial facts and violated due process. | Held: No plain error. Misstatement was minor and did not affect the crux of Williams’s defense. |
| Is the 10-year sentence excessive or improperly based on double-counting the same conduct? | Sentence within statutory range; court considered mitigating and aggravating factors and used deterrence properly. | Sentence excessive given youth, lack of adult record, rehabilitation potential; court double-counted firing as element and aggravator. | Held: No excessive-sentence error. Sentence not manifestly disproportionate; no impermissible double-counting. |
| Do two provisions of 730 ILCS 5/3-6-3(a)(2) conflict so Williams gets day-for-day credit? | Statute’s language and legislative intent show amendments apply by date; crimes committed after 2005 fall under clause denying day-for-day credit. | Williams argues clauses conflict for post-2005 offense and rule of lenity requires day-for-day credit. | Held: No conflict. Clause (iv) applies to offenses committed on/after June 23, 2005; Williams must serve at least 85% (no day-for-day credit). |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Lee, 213 Ill. 2d 218 (2004) (elements of self-defense and burden on State to disprove beyond a reasonable doubt)
- People v. Evans, 209 Ill. 2d 194 (2004) (trier of fact resolves credibility and inconsistencies)
- People v. Thompson, 238 Ill. 2d 598 (2010) (plain error doctrine standard for unpreserved errors)
- People v. Mitchell, 152 Ill. 2d 274 (1992) (trial court’s failure to recall crucial defense testimony can violate due process)
- People v. Streit, 142 Ill. 2d 13 (1991) (appellate court will not reweigh sentencing factors)
- People v. Fern, 189 Ill. 2d 48 (1999) (standard for determining whether a sentence is excessive)