People v. Anderson

• Citation: 2022 IL App (1st) 181963 U
• Decision Date: 27 September 2022
• Docket Number: 1-18-1963
• Parties: THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ERIK ANDERSON, Defendant-Appellant.
• Court: United States Appellate Court of Illinois

2022 IL App (1st) 181963-U

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
ERIK ANDERSON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 1-18-1963

Court of Appeals of Illinois, First District, Second Division

September 27, 2022

This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and is not precedent except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1).

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County. No. 16 CR 14145 Honorable James B. Linn, Judge, presiding.

PRESIDING JUSTICE FITZGERALD SMITH delivered the judgment of the court. Justices Howse and Ellis concurred in the judgment.

ORDER

FITZGERALD SMITH PRESIDING JUSTICE

¶ 1 Held: We affirm defendant's convictions for first degree murder and mob action over his contentions that (1) he was not proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt; (2) his convictions violate the one-act, one-crime rule; and (3) his sentence was improper.

¶ 2 Following a bench trial, defendant Erik Anderson was found guilty of three counts of first degree murder and one count of mob action. The trial court merged the first degree murder counts and imposed a 29-year prison term thereon concurrent to a 3-year term for mob action. On appeal, defendant first contends that he was not proven guilty of first degree murder beyond a reasonable

1

doubt when the State's case rested on "grainy" video footage. Second, he contends that his conviction for mob action must be vacated pursuant to the one-act, one-crime rule when it involves the same physical act as his conviction for first degree murder. Third, defendant challenges his sentence for first degree murder for relying on speculative evidence and being unconstitutionally disproportionate to a co-offender's sentence. We affirm.

¶ 3 Defendant was charged with three counts of first degree murder and one count of mob action arising from the death of Kimberly Schnackenberg on April 21, 2016.^[1] Relevant here, count I alleged that defendant, without lawful justification, intentionally or knowingly "beat and killed" Schnackenberg. 720 ILCS 5/9-1(a)(1) (West 2016). Count IV alleged that defendant, along with one or more persons, acting together and without the authority of law, engaged in the knowing or reckless use of force or violence, disturbing the public peace. 720 ILCS 5/25-1(a)(1) (West 2016).

¶ 4 Daniel Gonzalez testified that late on April 21, 2016, he and a companion were walking to a liquor store when he noticed a body in the alley behind a coach house where he used to live on the 2000 block of West 51st Street in Chicago. When he turned the body, he recognized Schnackenberg's tattoos. Gonzalez had known Schnackenberg for six or seven years, and she moved into the coach house after he moved out. Gonzalez, who had been drinking alcohol and smoking marijuana, had his cell phone but did not immediately call the police because he had a warrant for violating probation.

¶ 5 At a police station sometime later, Gonzalez viewed two video clips including one depicting Schnackenberg's death. In both clips, Gonzalez recognized Eddie Howlett, whom he

2

identified in court as "E," and purchased narcotics from "almost" daily. The State then published surveillance footage from the alley where Schnackenberg's body was discovered.^[2] Gonzalez identified the coach house and Howlett, who wore a black short-sleeved shirt and stood beside a Grand Am. Gonzalez also identified Howlett, Schnackenberg, and two men he knew as "D" and "L" in photographs taken from the video.

¶ 6 This court has reviewed the surveillance footage from the alley. At approximately 19:33 per the timestamp, the footage depicts a truck followed by a light-colored vehicle, slowly driving through the alley. Five men exit the vehicles. One man, wearing a two-tone top and boots, enters a gate and then reemerges.^[3] He looks around, urinates, and then points to the left. The four other men look and then everyone drives away. At 20:02, five men, including one in a two-tone jacket, enter and exit the frame.^[4] Ultimately, three of the men, including the man in the two-tone jacket, position themselves behind a building. One man leans from behind the building to look into the alley. Two figures, identified at trial as Howlett and Schnackenberg, then enter the alley. Howlett punches Schnackenberg in the face. She falls and the three men emerge from behind the building. The man in the two-tone jacket swings a stick or club downward toward Schnackenberg, another man kicks her, and the group flees.^[5]

3

¶ 7 The State entered stipulations that Schnackenberg's roommate, Willie Evans, would testify that he found her body in a pool of blood in the alley at 1:29 a.m. on April 22, 2016, and called 911. Dr. Matthew Fox would testify that he performed Schnackenberg's autopsy and determined the cause of death was craniocerebral blunt force injuries due to multiple impacts to the head, and the manner of death was homicide. Besides the "devastating injuries to the skull and brain," Dr. Fox also found blunt force injuries to Schnackenberg's upper extremities and left thigh.

¶ 8 Chicago police officer Kevin Killen testified that Schnackenberg, who worked as a confidential informant for four years, stated that Howlett sold narcotics at a certain address. At trial, Killen recognized Howlett, whom he encountered during a narcotics investigation in October 2015. Following Schnackenberg's death, Killen spoke to detectives, viewed a video of the beating, and identified Howlett as the person who punched Schnackenberg. Killen did not recognize defendant in court.

¶ 9 Chicago police detective Andrew Burns Jr. testified that he reviewed surveillance footage from a home on the alley and nearby businesses. Certain vehicles at the rear of Schnackenberg's residence also appeared in footage from other locations. Burns compiled the footage chronologically. The State published the compiled footage, which Burns narrated in court as follows.

¶ 10 In the footage, a black Yukon SUV and Grand Am turn from 51st Street onto Hoyne and enter an alley. The Grand Am stops at Schnackenberg's residence. The driver of the black Yukon SUV had "patches on his shirt." The vehicles then exit the alley. Later footage shows four individuals walk out of an alley, followed by another individual carrying what Burns described as a baseball bat over the right shoulder. The group, including the man wearing a "two-tone" jacket

4

and gold boots, then returns to the alley where the offense occurred. Burns noted that at one point, the man's jacket is open and displays his shirt and chain. In later footage, taken at liquor store, the man is wearing the chain but not his jacket.

¶ 11 This court has reviewed this footage, which is included in the record on appeal. In relevant part, the footage depicts a man in a two-tone jacket walking with the top of a bat visible.^[6] Additional footage from the liquor store depicts a man in a two-tone top and a gold chain. A man with a ponytail buys this person water, and then they leave.

¶ 12 On May 21, 2016, Burns interviewed defendant, who was wearing gold boots and a gold chain. Defendant viewed photographs taken from surveillance footage in the alley and the liquor store and identified himself in one photo and his black SUV in another. At trial, Burns identified the photographs shown to defendant.

¶ 13 These photographs were admitted and are included in the record on appeal. One photograph depicts two vehicles in the alley and another depicts five men standing around the same vehicles in the alley. Additional photographs from the liquor store footage depict a man in a gray sweater with black elbow patches.

¶ 14 In a videotaped interview, defendant initially denied knowing Howlett. Then, defendant stated that he met Howlett for the first time on the day of the offense. Defendant identified himself and his vehicle in the alley and explained that he was being "nosy."

¶ 15 During cross-examination, Burns disagreed that the footage was consistent with defendant's explanation for his presence in the alley. Burns spoke to defendant again after the footage from various businesses had been compiled. In the footage, Burns recognized defendant

5

with "his jacket open." Burns observed defendant's face in the liquor store video. In other footage, Burns observed an individual with facial features, "style," shoes, and clothing which matched the person in the liquor store. Burns testified that the man in the alley wearing a dark jacket with white patches carried a baseball bat behind the right shoulder, and that it was unclear what this person was wearing under the jacket. Defendant was arrested in August 2016.

¶ 16 Chicago police detective Daniel Kienzle testified that he recovered Schnackenberg's cellphone on April 22, 2016, and reviewed its messages. In court, he identified three photographs. The first showed the phone's contact list, which included an individual named "E" and listed his phone number as (561) ***-***4. The other photographs showed a text message received by Schnackenberg from E on April 21 at 7:51 p.m., approximately 15 minutes before her death.

¶ 17 Kienzle viewed footage from the crime scene and therein observed vehicles in the alley. On April 22, 2016, he located two vehicles, which appeared to be those in the video, parked near each other on the 5100 block of South Winchester. The two vehicles were a black GMC Yukon with license plate number E6***6 and a silver Pontiac Grand Am with the license plate Y8***4. On April 28, 2016, Kienzle showed Killen footage of the incident, and Killen identified Howlett. Kienzle then showed Killen a photograph of Howlett, and Killen again identified him. On August 19, 2016, Kienzle interviewed defendant.

¶ 18 The State admitted vehicle records showing that a 2005 GMC with the license plate of E6***6 was registered to defendant.

¶ 19 The State then published the video of defendant's August 19, 2016, interview...