People v. Willis
409 Ill. App. 3d 804
Ill. App. Ct.2011Background
- Defendant Priest Willis was convicted of delivery of less than one gram of heroin within 1,000 feet of a school after a July 2008 trial; the crime occurred August 2, 2007, within 300 feet of an elementary school in Chicago; undercover officers purchased drugs from Willis for $20, with $70 later recovered from Willis; heroin was found beneath a rock across the street; Willis testified that he did not sell drugs and Adams was the one owed money for prior work; multiple narcotics task force officers testified to the drug sale and identification of Willis.
- Officer Evangelides testified he bought drugs from Willis for $20 after being approached and asked for “blows”; the prerecorded $20 bill and two baggies were recovered; Officer Rivera recovered the $20 bill from Willis’ front pocket.
- The defense presented that Adams owed Willis for car work, Willis was not involved in drug sales, and the police arrival resulted in arrests; Willis was convicted by the jury.
- The trial court sentenced Willis as a Class X offender to eight years’ imprisonment based on criminal history; adjustments on mittimus and time credits were later appealed.
- The appellate court previously affirmed, then vacated and reconsidered in light of Thompson v. People, and ultimately affirmed Willis’s conviction and sentence while modifying the mittimus.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rule 431(b) compliance during voir dire | Willis argues Zehr principles were not adequately asked | Willis asserts automatic reversal for noncompliance | Rule 431(b) violated; however plain error not shown sufficient for reversal |
| Plain error, first prong | Error could have affected verdict due to incomplete Zehr questioning | No closely balanced evidence; error did not affect outcome | First prong not satisfied; no reversal |
| Plain error, second prong | Violation undermined fairness and integrity of trial | No evidence of biased jury; not reversible under second prong | Second prong not satisfied; no automatic reversal |
| Prosecutorial closing arguments | Comments about drug dealing near a school and CSI analogy prejudiced Willis | Closing arguments were within discretion and invited by defense strategy | No reversible error; any prejudice cured by jury instructions |
| Fines and fees; DNA fee and court system fees | DNA fee improperly assessed given prior DNA contribution; $50 and $5 fees analyzed | Some fees improper or unauthorized | DNA fee vacated; $50 court system fee proper; $5 fee vacated |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Thompson, 238 Ill.2d 598 (2010) (plain error standard application in Rule 431(b) cases; supervisory order discusses reliance on Rule 431(b))
- People v. Zehr, 103 Ill.2d 472 (1984) (Zehr principles underpin Rule 431(b) voir dire requirements)
- People v. Yarbor, 383 Ill.App.3d 676 (2008) (mandatory questioning of Zehr principles during voir dire in Rule 431(b) context)
- People v. Glasper, 234 Ill.2d 173 (2009) (concludes Rule 431(b) questioning is not indispensable to impartiality; methods may vary)
- People v. Lawler, 142 Ill.2d 548 (1991) (closing arguments not evidence; standard for reviewing prosecutorial comments)
- People v. Perry, 224 Ill.2d 312 (2007) (closing arguments may be cured by proper jury instructions)
- People v. Nicholas, 218 Ill.2d 104 (2005) (prosecutor may comment on evidence and reasonable inferences)