People v. Thomas

Decision Date17 May 1990
Docket NumberNo. 1-87-2924,1-87-2924
Citation556 N.E.2d 721,198 Ill.App.3d 1035
Parties, 145 Ill.Dec. 103 The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Anthony THOMAS, Defendant-Appellant.
CourtUnited States Appellate Court of Illinois

Michael J. Pelletier, Deputy Defender, Kenneth L. Jones, Asst. Appellate Defender, Chicago, for defendant-appellant.

Cecil A. Partee, State's Atty. (Renee Goldfarb, David R. Butzen and Howard D. Weisman, Asst. State's Attys, of counsel), Chicago, for plaintiff-appellee.

Presiding Justice McMORROW delivered the opinion of the court:

Following a bench trial, defendant Anthony Thomas was convicted of concealing a fugitive (Ill.Rev.Stat.1985, ch. 38, par. 31-5) and sentenced to one year of imprisonment. Because we conclude that the evidence was insufficient to prove defendant guilty of this offense beyond a reasonable doubt, we reverse.

The following pertinent evidence was presented at defendant's trial. On December 15, 1986, defendant was questioned by Detective Thomas Ptak of the Chicago police department at an area police station regarding the homicide of Eric Williams (Williams), which had occurred a day earlier. At this interview, defendant told Detective Ptak that on the day of the incident, defendant and Eric Williams (Williams) had an argument outside a tavern. Defendant told the detective that at some point during this argument, defendant made a phone call. Defendant stated that at some point after he made this telephone call, Williams was shot outside the tavern. Defendant said that he was standing beside Williams at the time of the shooting. Defendant told Detective Ptak that the assailant's first name was Ron. Defendant described the shooter as approximately six feet tall and weighing approximately 200 pounds. Defendant viewed mugshot books, but could not identify the assailant. Defendant was not given Miranda warnings during the questioning, because Detective Ptak did not consider defendant to be either under arrest, in custodial interrogation, or a suspect in the shooting, since other eyewitnesses had told the detective that defendant had not shot Williams. Detective Ptak testified that at this interview, defendant "admitted it did not look good for him [defendant]."

The following evening, Detective Ptak spoke to defendant on the street near defendant's home. Defendant told the detective that defendant was "still trying to find out who had shot" Williams. Approximately a week later, defendant was again interviewed by Detective Ptak at an area police station regarding the homicide. He was not given Miranda warnings, because Detective Ptak had not placed defendant under arrest, did not consider the setting to be one of custodial interrogation, and did not consider defendant to be a suspect in the shooting. During the course of the interview, defendant told Detective Ptak that defendant's first cousin, Ronald Batson (Batson), had shot Williams upon Batson's arrival at the scene following defendant's telephone call to Batson. Defendant gave the officer Batson's address and phone number. Defendant told Detective Ptak that defendant had not provided this additional information earlier because defendant was afraid Batson would involve defendant in the homicide. Batson, who matched the physical description given by defendant and whose photograph was not included in the mugshot books viewed by defendant during earlier interviews with the detective, was later arrested for the homicide.

Based upon this evidence, the trial court found defendant guilty of concealing a fugitive and sentenced him to one year of imprisonment. Defendant appeals.

Defendant asserts that the evidence was insufficient to prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The offense of concealing or aiding a fugitive is defined as follows:

"Every person not standing in the relation of husband, wife, parent, child, brother or sister to the offender, who, with intent to prevent the apprehension of the offender, conceals his knowledge that an offense has been committed or harbors, aids or conceals the offender, commits a Class 4 felony." Ill.Rev.Stat.1985, ch. 38, par. 31-5.

Illinois cases interpreting this statutory provision have held that, in order to "conceal" an offender, a person must take "an affirmative...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • People v. Ramos, 1-03-2963.
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • 30 d4 Setembro d4 2004
  • People v. Lampley, 1–09–0661.
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • 10 d3 Novembro d3 2010
    ..., 939 N.E.2d 536] 15–year sentence did not further the objectives of rehabilitation and restoration to useful citizenship. Center, 198 Ill.App.3d at 1035, 145 Ill.Dec. 106, 556 N.E.2d 724. In this case, defendant notes that his criminal history, though more extensive than the defendant's in......
  • People v. Brogan, 1-03-0829.
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • 26 d4 Agosto d4 2004
    ......For example, he argues that in People v. Thomas, 198 Ill.App.3d 1035, 145 Ill.Dec. 103, 556 N.E.2d 721 (1990), this court found that the defendant's failure to disclose to a detective his full ......
  • People v. Center, 1-87-1591
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • 17 d4 Maio d4 1990
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT