People v. T.B. (In re T.B.)
| Decision Date | 18 March 2020 |
| Docket Number | No. 1-19-1041,1-19-1041 |
| Citation | 2020 IL App (1st) 191041,439 Ill.Dec. 511,148 N.E.3d 251 |
| Parties | IN RE T.B., a Minor (The People of the State of Illinois, Petitioner-Appellee, v. T.B., Respondent-Appellant). |
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
James E. Chadd, Patricia Mysza, and Rebecca Cohen, of State Appellate Defender's Office, of Chicago, for appellant.
Kimberly M. Foxx, State's Attorney, of Chicago (Alan J. Spellberg, Annette Collins, and Tyler J. Cox, Assistant State's Attorneys, of counsel), for the People.
¶ 1 After a bench trial in juvenile court, 17-year-old minor-respondent T.B. was found guilty of robbery, attempted robbery, two counts of aggravated battery, and two counts of battery. Respondent was adjudicated delinquent and sentenced to one year of probation. On appeal, respondent claims the State failed to prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, the probation condition of "no gang activity" was unconstitutional, and his battery conviction should be vacated under the one-act, one-crime doctrine.
¶ 2 We agree with only his last argument regarding the one-act, one-crime doctrine. We find the evidence sufficient to support the adjudication. And the prohibition on gang activity easily satisfied first amendment and due process concerns. We thus affirm in part and vacate in part.
¶ 4 In November 2018, the State filed a petition for adjudication of wardship, charging respondent with robbery, attempted robbery, two counts of aggravated battery, and two counts of battery. The gist of the State's petition was that on November 2, 2018, respondent took a cell phone from Manuel Ordonez using force and that he attempted to take a cell phone from Dennys Ordonez.
¶ 5 At trial, Dennys Ordonez testified that around noon on November 2, 2018, he and his younger brother, Manuel Ordonez, went to a Chase Bank located at 69th Street and Ashland Avenue in Chicago, Illinois. After finishing their business, Dennys and Manuel left and got into Dennys's car. However, Dennys's car would not start, so he called a tow truck. Afterwards, Dennys and Manuel walked to a bus stop located a block away at 69th Street and Paulina Street.
¶ 6 While waiting for the bus, Dennys saw two people across the street near a convenience store walking north toward Dennys and Manuel "scoping us" and "looking at [Manuel]." Dennys explained that the people were "mean-mugging me and, like, looking around and, like, actually looking into me like, in a bad way; so, like, looking kind of suspicious towards me, but they were looking more at my little brother." As a result, Dennys was
¶ 7 Dennys testified that the two individuals then crossed onto the side of the street that Dennys and Manuel were on. When asked whether he "g[o]t a good look at them as they were approaching," Dennys answered in the affirmative. Dennys stated that it took the individuals 15 to 20 seconds to cross the street and that he was "looking at them the whole time." He further testified that "it was light outside and there was no traffic and there was no one around." As a result, Dennys was able to observe "what [the individuals] were wearing and everything." He explained that the person on the left was "light-skinned," "kind of, tall and skinny," and "was wearing a * * * red and black jacket," and that the person on the right was "tall," "skinny," and "light-skinned" and was wearing a "navy jacket" and a "hair rag on top of their hair."
¶ 8 After the first group of two individuals crossed the street, they were joined by a second group of three people coming from the right. Asked to describe those three individuals, Dennys testified that "[t]hey were all light-skinned and tall and skinny." He observed that one person was wearing a green jacket, one person was wearing a black jacket, and one person was wearing a hoodie. Dennys testified that he observed the second group as they approached the bus stop for "about, like, ten seconds." Dennys then made an in-court identification of respondent as one of the two individuals who came from the convenience store.
¶ 9 Once the groups merged, they approached Dennys and Manuel and surrounded them. The five individuals then "jumped" Dennys and Manuel. According to Dennys, "[o]ne of the guys from the right" punched Manuel in his chest and jaw. Dennys testified that he "went into self-defense mode" and "hit one" and then he "went back." When Dennys "went back," the five individuals "started punching everybody and then they started jumping on [Manuel] and they were asking, give me your phone, give me your phone," referring to both Dennys and Manuel. Dennys testified that three people were "on" Manuel and that he was attempting to fight off two people. He stated that, while the three individuals were stomping on Manuel, the other two were hitting him. He stated that he was "scared" for Manuel "because nothing ever like that happened to us before other than that."
¶ 10 Eventually, Manuel handed over his cell phone. The three people who had been stomping on Manuel then turned their attention to Dennys. That gave Manuel a window of opportunity to flee—which he took, running to the other side of the street to summon help. But it also left Dennys facing a five-on-one fight. However, at that moment, Dennys and Manuel saw a police car. In the unfolding chaos, Dennys attempted to flag down the officer while being beaten by the mob. Once the mob became aware an officer was nearby, the individuals ran to the right and fled down Paulina Street. All told, Dennys estimated that, from first contact to flight, the encounter lasted "about five minutes."
¶ 11 When the officers stopped, Dennys told them what happened and gave a description of the offenders. A few minutes later, Dennys and Manuel were taken by police car to an address near 68th Street and Hermitage Avenue to make an identification. According to Dennys, when they arrived, he saw a person whom he later identified in court as respondent "talking to the cops." Dennys testified that he was in the police car to make an identification, though he stated that the police did not tell him who to pick.
¶ 12 When he arrived at the location, Dennys saw the person that punched Manuel in the face, whom he later identified to the police as respondent, speaking to some officers. Dennys added that respondent was not in handcuffs when he observed the suspect, that he was five feet away when he made the identification, that it was still light outside, and that only five minutes had elapsed from the time of the incident to the identification.
¶ 13 On cross-examination, Dennys testified that he decided to take the bus after his car broke down, because it was going to take the tow truck an hour to arrive. There was a bus stop at the corner where the bank was located at 69th and Ashland Avenue, but he opted to walk to the stop at 69th Street and Paulina Street because "someone got jumped at 69th and Ashland." Dennys further testified that, when he got to 68th Street and Hermitage Avenue, respondent was speaking to three or four police officers.
¶ 14 Manuel Ordonez testified that on November 2, 2018, he went to a Chase Bank at 69th Street and Ashland Avenue with Dennys. After finishing, Dennys's car broke down, so they called a tow truck and then walked to a bus stop. Manuel could not recall the bus stop's location, but he explained that it was on 69th Street and was approximately a two-minute walk from the Chase Bank.
¶ 15 According to Manuel, while he and Dennys were waiting at the bus stop, they "got jumped." He explained that he was "looking north and two people came from * * * north to south and two people came from my right and they surrounded us." Manuel noted that the people who approached from the north were facing him and that they were "looking around and staring at us." Manuel testified that the individuals were "tall" and "light black" and that one of the people was "wearing a black jacket." He estimated that he observed them during their approach for "like, ten seconds."
¶ 16 Manuel explained that, as the two individuals approached, he observed two more people come from his right. Manuel testified that one of those people was medium height and was wearing a black skullcap and a blue jacket.
¶ 17 Manuel testified that the individuals eventually surrounded him and Dennys and that he was hit in his chest and jaw by one of the people who came from the north. Later, Manuel identified defendant in court as the person who punched him in the chest. Those initial blows caused Manuel to fall, at which point he "started getting beaten up by three people." As the group beat up Manuel, they demanded his cell phone. Eventually, Manuel handed his phone over. Manuel testified that, during this time, he was four feet from the attackers.
¶ 18 At that point, Manuel saw that the people who were beating him up had gone to fight Dennys. Manuel then ran to a store and asked the owner to call the police. Manuel then saw a police car. At that point, the attackers were fleeing. Manuel then spoke to police officers and gave them a description of the attackers.
¶ 19 Approximately 5 to 10 minutes later, Manuel and Dennys were taken by police car to view two possible suspects. Manuel testified that the police did not tell him who to pick, that neither suspect was in handcuffs, and that he was 15 feet away from the suspects. Manuel testified that one suspect was sitting down on the stairs leading up to a house and the second suspect was standing next to the first. Manuel told the police that the second suspect, whom he identified as respondent, was the person who punched him in the chest and face. He explained that, at the time of the identification, respondent was wearing the same clothes he wore during the attack.
¶ 20 On cross-examination, Manuel testified that he only gave a description to the police of two of the four...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Zamora
...implicates due process in that statutes must give persons of common intelligence fair notice of what the law demands of them. In re T.B. , 2020 IL App (1st) 191041, ¶ 88, 439 Ill.Dec. 511, 148 N.E.3d 251 (citing United States v. Davis , 588 U.S. ––––, ––––, 139 S. Ct. 2319, 2325, 204 L.Ed.2......
-
People v. Gavin
...court to screen such evidence for reliability before allowing the jury to assess its creditworthiness." Id. at 245; see also In re T.B., 2020 IL App (1st) 191041, ¶ 38, 148 N.E.3d 251 ("the remedy of drops out of the picture, because the defendant is not alleging police misconduct"). Accord......