People v. Blackwell, 73240

CourtSupreme Court of Illinois
Writing for the CourtNICKELS
Citation171 Ill.2d 338,665 N.E.2d 782,216 Ill.Dec. 524
Parties, 216 Ill.Dec. 524 The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Appellee, v. Michael A. BLACKWELL, Appellant.
Docket NumberNo. 73240,73240
Decision Date18 April 1996

Page 782

665 N.E.2d 782
171 Ill.2d 338, 216 Ill.Dec. 524
The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Appellee,
Michael A. BLACKWELL, Appellant.
No. 73240.
Supreme Court of Illinois.
April 18, 1996.

Page 784

[216 Ill.Dec. 526] [171 Ill.2d 342] Charles M. Schiedel, Deputy Defender, and John J. [171 Ill.2d 343] Hanlon, Assistant Defender, of the Office of the State Appellate Defender, Springfield, for appellant.

James E. Ryan, Attorney General, Springfield, and James W. Glasgow, State's Attorney, Joliet (Barbara A. Preiner, Solicitor General, and Arleen C. Anderson and Penelope Moutoussamy George, Assistant Attorneys General, Chicago, of counsel), for the People.

Justice NICKELS delivered the opinion of the court:

After a jury trial in Will County, defendant was convicted of three counts of first degree murder (Ill.Rev.Stat.1989, ch. 38, par. 9-1(a)(2)), one count of aggravated battery with a firearm (Ill.Rev.Stat.1989, ch. 38, par. 12-4.2), and one count of reckless conduct (Ill.Rev.Stat.1989, ch. 38, par. 12-5). Defendant waived his right to be sentenced by a jury, and the trial judge found defendant eligible for the death penalty (Ill.Rev.Stat.1989, ch. 38, par. 9-1(b)(3)). After considering factors in aggravation and in mitigation, the trial judge sentenced defendant to death (Ill.Rev.Stat.1989, ch. 38, par. 9-1(h)). Defendant appealed directly to this court. Ill. Const.1970, art. VI, § 4(b); Ill.Rev.Stat.1989, ch. 38, par. 9-1(i); 134 Ill.2d R. 603.

While defendant's appeal was pending in this court, the Supreme Court announced its decision in J.E.B. v. Alabama ex rel. T.B., 511 U.S. 127, 114 S.Ct. 1419, 128 L.Ed.2d 89 (1994). In J.E.B., the Court held that peremptory challenges cannot be used to discriminate on the basis of gender during jury selection. On appeal, defendant argued, inter alia, that the State had exercised its peremptory challenges in violation of J.E.B. This court found that defendant had established a prima facie case of gender discrimination (People v. Blackwell, 164 Ill.2d 67, 207 Ill.Dec. 44, 646 N.E.2d 610 (1995)) and remanded the cause to the circuit [171 Ill.2d 344] court for a hearing to give the State the opportunity to present reasons for its use of peremptory challenges. After a hearing, the circuit court found that the explanations advanced by the State for its use of peremptory challenges were gender neutral. Defendant again appeals to this court, challenging the trial court's ruling that the State's explanations were gender neutral.


Testimony at trial revealed the following. Defendant grew up in Joliet but later moved to Mississippi. On October 18, 1990, defendant was in Joliet visiting his friend Virgil Jones. On the evening of October 18, Jones suggested to defendant that they visit a friend of Jones who lived in a nearby apartment. Jones and defendant drove to this apartment, and defendant was introduced to four individuals, one of whom was Steve Scott. Defendant brought a semiautomatic handgun with him, concealed in the waistband of his trousers.

One of defendant's new acquaintances suggested that the group attend a party in another apartment in the building. At this time, unknown to defendant, four members of the Latin Kings gang were present at the party. Shortly after defendant and his acquaintances arrived at the small studio apartment, a fight started between Steve Scott and the Latin Kings. Defendant then pulled out his handgun and fired at Scott's attackers. Three Latin Kings (Desiderio Martinez, Robert "Jimmy" Gonzalez, and John Garcia) were killed and another (David Lopez) was wounded. A fifth individual (Wendy Magee), who had accompanied defendant to the apartment and was not involved in the fight, was also wounded. The police later arrested defendant near Jones' apartment.

Eight witnesses, including defendant, testified regarding the specific details of the shooting. Several witnesses testified that the Latin Kings confronted Scott, [171 Ill.2d 345] "flashed" gang signs at him, and accused him of being a member of the "Two-Sixers" gang. The Latin Kings and the Two-Sixers were rival gangs in Joliet. At some point, one of the Latin Kings removed his own shirt, banged his own head against a wall, and said that he

Page 785

[216 Ill.Dec. 527] had just been released from prison. Scott told the Latin Kings that he was no longer a member of the Two-Sixers, but the Latin Kings blocked him into a corner of the apartment. Soon afterwards, the Latin Kings started pushing and grappling with Scott.

After the fight started, Scott managed to push his way to the door of the apartment and leave. The fight lasted about 15 seconds. The last time Scott saw the four Latin Kings they were facing toward the door and away from defendant. Before the shooting, no one threatened defendant or "flashed" gang signs at him. Scott's attackers did not draw any weapons, and Scott's only injury was a bump behind his ear. Several witnesses stated that the fight did not seem serious. Scott, however, testified that he was afraid that one of his attackers had a concealed weapon and would use it against him.

As Scott was leaving, defendant removed his weapon and fired one shot into the group that had attacked Scott. The four attackers started to turn towards defendant. Defendant then fired numerous shots at the victims. Defendant fired a total of 14 times in the span of 10 to 15 seconds at Scott's attackers. Some witnesses testified that one of the victims was shot after he had fallen to the ground. Witnesses also testified that a second victim was shot in the back of the head as he was fleeing. A third victim was shot five times, once when he was lying on the floor and kicking the door to the apartment as defendant was leaving.

Defendant testified at trial. Defendant stated that he brought a handgun with him to Joliet because he [171 Ill.2d 346] knew of the gang violence there. Defendant testified that his brother was killed by the Latin Kings in 1986 and that he and his family were harassed by the Latin Kings after his brother's shooting. For this reason, defendant and his family moved to Mississippi.

With respect to the shooting, defendant essentially testified that he panicked. Defendant stated that, after firing an initial shot, he fired rapidly into the mass of individuals in front of him. Defendant testified that, after the fight started, he was afraid that he might have to fight next. In addition, defendant thought that the victims might have weapons with them. The police later recovered a knife from the pockets of one of the victims. Defendant also believed that Scott's life was in danger when the Latin Kings were attacking Scott. According to defendant, he felt that the only way he could get out of the apartment was by shooting. After defendant was arrested, he gave the police a statement similar to this testimony.


During jury selection, the State exercised 15 of 17 peremptory challenges to exclude women from the venire, four of whom were black. Defendant argued that the State was racially discriminating in violation of Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986). At a Batson hearing during voir dire, Assistant State's Attorney Thomas discussed the State's general strategy.

While seeking to show that the State was not discriminating on the basis of race, Thomas specifically noted that the State had used its 17 peremptory challenges to exclude 15 women from the jury. Thomas suggested that the State was excluding potential jurors on the basis of gender. Thomas then stated that he excluded the women because he was concerned about potential sympathy for defendant's mother. Thomas later reiterated[171 Ill.2d 347] this concern when discussing specific reasons for dismissing one of the prospective jurors. The jury was ultimately composed of five women and seven men. As stated, after the United States Supreme Court announced its decision in J.E.B., the cause was remanded by this court to the circuit court for a hearing to determine if the State had discriminated on the basis of gender.

At the remand hearing, the circuit court listened to the reasons offered by the State for each of its peremptory challenges. The State's reasons were offered by former Assistant State's Attorney Tomczak, who was one of the prosecutors at defendant's trial. Tomczak was not the prosecutor who had made the statements at the original Batson hearing. The State did not offer any explanations

Page 786

[216 Ill.Dec. 528] from Thomas, the prosecutor who had made the statements regarding gender.

Tomczak had possession of the notes taken during jury selection. He used these notes, as well as the transcript, to refresh his memory. Tomczak stated that this case was his first death penalty case and he therefore remembered it reasonably well. At the remand hearing, Tomczak introduced a second general strategy used by the State that was not presented at the original Batson hearing. He stated that, in his experience, jurors fall into two categories: "proactive" and "reactive." Proactive jurors are leaders and good communicators. They are more aggressive. Tomczak stated that he did not want too many proactive jurors on the jury because that would increase the possibility of a hung jury. Tomczak then went into specific detail about the reasons for excluding each woman from the venire. After hearing the State's reasons, the circuit court found that these reasons were gender neutral.


Defendant has raised several arguments on appeal. [171 Ill.2d 348] Based on our disposition of this case, we address only three issues: (1) whether the State discriminated on the basis of gender during jury selection; (2) whether the evidence was sufficient to support the first degree murder convictions; and (3) whether the imposition of the death penalty was excessive in this case. For the reasons discussed below, we reverse and remand for a new trial.


In J.E.B., the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
75 cases
  • People v. Harris, 80084
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • 16 Abril 1998
    ...any relevant mitigating factors." Smith, 177 Ill.2d at 98, 226 Ill.Dec. 425, 685 N.E.2d 880, citing[182 Ill.2d 166] People v. Blackwell, 171 Ill.2d 338, 216 Ill.Dec. 524, 665 N.E.2d 782 (1996); People v. Leger, 149 Ill.2d 355, 173 Ill.Dec. 612, 597 N.E.2d 586 (1992); People v. Buggs, 112 Il......
  • People v. Jackson, 88474.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • 20 Diciembre 2001
    ...the legislature never intended that every defendant who is eligible for the death penalty receive a death sentence (People v. Blackwell, 171 Ill.2d 338, 216 Ill.Dec. 524, 665 N.E.2d 782 (1996)), and this court has not hesitated to vacate a death sentence where the circumstances did not indi......
  • People v. Simon, 1–09–1197.
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • 26 Agosto 2011
    ...of fact could have found that defendant failed to prove the mitigating factor by a preponderance of the evidence. People v. Blackwell, 171 Ill.2d 338, 358, 216 Ill.Dec. 524, 665 N.E.2d 782 (1996); Huddleston, 243 Ill.App.3d at 1021, 184 Ill.Dec. 885, 614 N.E.2d 86. ¶ 53 Defendant claims tha......
  • People v. Baez, 98911.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • 25 Febrero 2011
    ...that, in light of the aggravating factors, death is the appropriate sentence. Defendant compares his case to People v. Blackwell, 171 Ill.2d 338, 216 Ill.Dec. 524, 665 N.E.2d 782 (1996). In that case, the defendant's brother had been killed by the Latin Kings gang. While visiting in Joliet,......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • Jury Selection
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Illinois Objections
    • 1 Mayo 2013
    ...T.B. , 511 US 127, 114 S Ct 1419, 128 L Ed 2d 89 (1994); People v. Blackwell , 164 Ill 2d 67, 646 NE2d 610 (1995); People v. Blackwell , 171 Ill 2d 338, 665 NE2d 782 (1996); People v. Randall , 363 Ill App 3d 1124, 845 NE2d 120 (4th Dist 2006). p rocedure Batson v. Kentucky , 476 US 79, 106......
  • Table of Cases
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Illinois Objections
    • 1 Mayo 2013
    ...§§1:170, 1:330, 1:340, 1:350, 1:380, 1:390 People v. Blackwell , 164 Ill 2d 67, 646 NE2d 610 (1995), §§1:90, 2:250 People v. Blackwell , 171 Ill 2d 338, 665 NE2d 782 (1996), §2:250 People v. Blair , 2011 Ill App (2d) 070862, 952 NE2d 62 (2011), §11:60 People v. Blair , 215 Ill 2d 427 (2005)......

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