Walton v. The Illinois State Police
2015 IL App (4th) 141055
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2015Background
- In 1991 Walton pleaded guilty to battery (domestic incident) and was later convicted for violating a protection order; no jail time was imposed for the battery plea.
- Walton obtained a FOID card in 2011; the Illinois State Police revoked it in February 2014 based on the 1991 battery conviction.
- Walton petitioned the Sangamon County circuit court for a hearing under section 10 of the FOID Act; the court held an evidentiary hearing, heard testimony and character evidence, and concluded Walton would not be likely to act dangerously.
- The circuit court reversed the revocation and declared Walton eligible for a FOID card.
- The State appealed, arguing (1) Walton’s 1991 guilty plea is a disqualifying "misdemeanor crime of domestic violence" under federal law (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9)), and (2) the FOID Act (as amended in 2013) forbids circuit courts from ordering issuance of a FOID card when federal law bars possession.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Walton’s 1991 guilty plea qualifies as a federal "misdemeanor crime of domestic violence" conviction | Walton: his guilty plea without jail or fine should not count as a conviction for federal disqualification (relying on analogies to Hengels/traffic-conviction concerns) | State: under federal law states define "conviction;" Illinois statutes treat a guilty plea resulting in judgment as a conviction | Held: The 1991 guilty plea is a conviction under Illinois law and thus qualifies as a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence for purposes of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9) |
| Whether the circuit court could order issuance of a FOID card despite the federal firearm disability | Walton: Coram permits circuit-court relief and review to restore rights; the court’s factual public-safety finding authorized relief | State: 2013 FOID Act amendments prohibit courts from granting relief if federal law bars possession | Held: Under the FOID Act (2014 text), courts may not order issuance when federal law prohibits possession; the circuit court lacked authority to restore Walton’s FOID card |
| Whether Coram controls Walton’s claim | Walton: Coram allows judicial review to remove disability | State: Coram addressed the prior FOID Act and its references to the 2013 amendments were dicta and not controlling | Held: Coram does not control; the 2013 amendments clearly bar court-ordered relief that would contravene federal law |
| Whether Hengels or Smith affect the definition of "conviction" | Walton: Hengels suggests certain lesser proceedings lack reliability to constitute convictions for collateral purposes | State: Those decisions concern hearsay/admissibility, not statutory definitions of conviction | Held: Hengels/Smith do not alter Illinois statutory definition of conviction; they do not prevent Walton’s plea from counting as a conviction |
Key Cases Cited
- Dickerson v. New Banner Inst., 460 U.S. 103 (U.S. 1983) (prior Supreme Court decision addressing state-law determination of convictions)
- Smith v. Andrews, 54 Ill. App. 2d 51 (Ill. App. 1964) (admissibility exception: when convictions may be used to prove underlying facts)
- Hengels v. Gilski, 127 Ill. App. 3d 894 (Ill. App. 1984) (holding traffic-court convictions may lack reliability for collateral civil proof)
- Coram v. State of Illinois, 2013 IL 113867 (Ill. 2013) (Illinois Supreme Court decision on FOID Act provisions; discussion of 2013 amendments was dicta and not controlling)