People v. Bruemmer
| Decision Date | 25 August 2021 |
| Docket Number | 4-19-0877 |
| Citation | 2021 IL App (4th) 190877,192 N.E.3d 823,455 Ill.Dec. 994 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Rhonda BRUEMMER, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
James E. Chadd, Catherine K. Hart, and Joshua Scanlon, of State Appellate Defender's Office, of Springfield, for appellant.
Randy Yedinak, State's Attorney, of Pontiac (Patrick Delfino, David J. Robinson, and Linda S. McClain, of State's Attorneys Appellate Prosecutor's Office, of counsel), for the People.
¶ 1 In September 2019, a jury found defendant, Rhonda Bruemmer, guilty of criminal abuse or neglect of an elderly person ( 720 ILCS 5/12-4.4a(b)(1)(B) (West 2016)). In December 2019, the trial court imposed the following sentence: 24 months’ probation, 180 days’ incarceration in the Livingston County jail with credit for 6 days and 90 days suspended, and undergoing a mental health evaluation and completing any recommended treatment.
¶ 2 On appeal, defendant challenges her conviction on three bases, arguing the State failed to prove her guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, she received ineffective assistance from trial counsel, and the State rendered the trial unfair when it made improper comments during closing arguments. We agree defendant received ineffective assistance of counsel and, therefore, reverse defendant's conviction and the trial court's judgment, remanding for a new trial.
¶ 4 In May 2018, the State charged defendant with criminal abuse or neglect of an elderly person ( 720 ILCS 5/12-4.4a(b)(1)(B) (West 2016)), a Class 3 felony. The State alleged the following:
"On or about August and September 2017 *** defendant, a caregiver for Mark Bruemmer, an elderly person, failed to perform acts that she knew or reasonably should have known were necessary to maintain or preserve the health of Mark Bruemmer, and that failure caused Mark Bruemmer's health to be endangered or a preexisting condition to deteriorate ***."
After several delays, the matter proceeded to a jury trial in September 2019.
¶ 5 In its opening statement, the State indicated, "Mark is not able to be here today," explaining the 72-year-old Mark now lived in Arizona and suffered from dementia. Nevertheless, the State indicated the evidence would detail what defendant failed to do when taking care of her father. By contrast, defense counsel's opening statement focused on what defendant did do for her father. Counsel stated defendant "was doing her best to provide care for her father," noting it was defendant who ensured Mark could remain in his home. Defense counsel acknowledged Mark suffered health problems, but he claimed the evidence would show defendant "did her best under the circumstances" and reiterated "she did everything that she could to provide [Mark] with adequate care."
¶ 6 The State called three witnesses and presented photos of Mark's home from August 2017. Renee Bruemmer testified Mark is her father and defendant is her sister. She identified Mark's date of birth as August 20, 1947, making him 70 years old during the alleged abuse or neglect. Renee explained defendant lived with their father. Renee testified she traveled from Arizona, where she lived, to her father's home in Odell, Illinois, in August 2017. She acknowledged she made the trip once defendant phoned her to tell her she believed Mark was dying because he could not walk and was incontinent.
¶ 7 Renee explained she went to Mark's home on August 24, 2017, with two of her brothers and found "[t]he house was disgusting." She testified they found Mark lying in a hospital bed in the living room, which was littered with garbage and dirty adult diapers. She said the carpets were covered "in I don't even know what." Renee testified her father got out of the hospital bed he was lying in and sat in a wheelchair during part of the visit. She stated she and defendant left to buy food because there was little food in the home. Renee testified defendant asked her to take Mark to his doctor's appointment the next day and Renee agreed to do so.
¶ 8 Renee testified that when she arrived at Mark's home the following day, she found him alone in the living room while an unidentified woman was cleaning cabinets in another room—defendant was not there. Renee observed Mark's diaper was full and "he was covered from like his shirt to his socks in urine." Renee explained Mark's arms were stuck to the bed, so when she tried to pick him up he developed skin tears and started "bleeding everywhere." Renee testified she took Mark to the bathroom, wiped him down, and put clean clothes on him. She called a social worker at the veterans facility to ask what she should do for her father. Renee stated she and her brother, Randy, took their father to the nearby Veterans Affairs Hines Hospital (Hines VA), where he remained hospitalized for 9 or 10 days. She testified her father then went to a rehabilitation center in Aurora, Illinois, until February 2018, when he moved to Arizona to live with her.
¶ 9 The State next called Randy Bruemmer. He testified Mark is his father and defendant and Renee are his sisters. Randy testified defendant had lived with Mark "on and off" over the span of five years. He stated defendant had moved back in with Mark in April or May 2017 and was still living with him in August 2017. Like Renee, Randy testified that defendant called him in August 2017 to tell him Mark was not doing well. He confirmed he went to his father's house with Renee and their brother, Ryan, on August 24, 2017. He described the house as "just a mess *** just stuff thrown everywhere." He said the home smelled like "[a]nimals, feces, urine, [and] smoke." He also described the home as "[j]ust disgusting." He likewise testified "[t]here wasn't much food at all." Randy stated he took pictures of the home to document He testified he also took photos of the refrigerators to show the lack of food. Through Randy's testimony, the State moved to admit 12 photographs of Mark's home.
¶ 10 On cross-examination, Randy acknowledged he visited Mark only once or twice a year. He testified defendant previously contacted him to inform him that Mark had fallen outside and laid in the yard until someone found him. Randy stated he saw that Mark wore adult diapers during the visit on August 24, but on redirect, he noted Mark also urinated in cups, which were then dumped in the toilet.
¶ 11 The State next called Glyza Vergara, a nurse at Hines VA, who testified she cared for Mark "for a couple of days" while he was hospitalized. She confirmed Mark was admitted to Hines VA on August 25, 2017, and discharged on September 2, 2017. Vergara testified she observed Mark had "a deep tissue injury in his left buttocks and *** coccyx." She explained a deep tissue injury is "a pressure wound *** that you can actually see in a patient if there's a limited mobility." She stated a patient can develop such a wound if confined to a bed. Vergara testified she observed Mark had other ailments, namely "multiple bruises [and] skin tears." On cross-examination, Vergara equated Mark's deep tissue wound to a bedsore
and acknowledged even patients receiving proper care in a hospital can develop bedsores.
¶ 12 When the State rested, defense counsel inquired of the court: "At some point can I reserve my motion for directed verdict?" The court answered, "yes," and the case proceeded to the defense's case.
¶ 13 Defendant called two witnesses as part of her defense that she sincerely tried to provide good care to her father. Michelle Billings testified she had known Mark and defendant for 20 years. She considered herself "very close" to Mark, saying: "He's my dad." Michelle testified she visited Mark and defendant's home daily in August 2017. She said Mark was suffering from health problems at that time and defendant was living with him and providing him care daily. Michelle explained Mark had difficulty walking independently and difficulty talking but defendant helped him, even though it was hard work for her. Specifically, Michelle testified defendant provided Mark with the following: a wheelchair, a hospital bed, a portable toilet, a walker, and rails for the bathtub. Michelle explained multiple people, including herself, helped defendant take care of Mark. She acknowledged Mark could not take care of himself, and she believed he "was doing okay" in defendant's care. Michelle testified she had never met defendant's siblings before August 2017, and she believed defendant was Mark's only child. Michelle also testified she saw people she later learned were defendant's siblings removing Mark's possessions from the home on August 24, 2017.
¶ 14 The defense next called Brigette Folkers, who testified she had known defendant and Mark for 15 years. She stated she was in Mark's home "[m]any times" during August 2017, and she was aware of Mark's health problems. Brigette stated Mark "was well taken care of." She described her last visit with Mark, days before he went to the hospital. She stated he was lying down when she first arrived, but he then got up and sat with her in the kitchen.
¶ 15 Outside the presence of the jury, defendant informed the trial court she decided not to testify, and the defense indicated it intended to rest with no further evidence. The State advised the court of its intent to call a rebuttal witness. Knowing this, the trial court discussed how to proceed, saying that after the rebuttal witness it would instruct the jury, "and when they are deliberating, I'll let you argue your motion for directed finding." Defense counsel replied, "That's fine." The trial court clarified for the record that during "a short side bar *** I did allow [defense counsel] to reserve his motion for directed finding before we proceed."
¶ 16 The State...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- People v. Petrie
-
People v. Coffey
... ... 38, 83 N.E.3d 671. "Accordingly, when 'considering ... whether counsel's performance was deficient, [we] must ... indulge a strong presumption that the challenged action, or ... inaction, was the result of sound trial strategy.'" ... People v. Bruemmer , 2021 IL App (4th) 190877, ¶ ... 40, 192 N.E.3d 823 (quoting People v. Poole , 2012 IL ... App (4th) 101017, ¶ 10, 972 N.E.2d 340). Generally, ... trial strategy encompasses such decisions as what to object ... to and when. See People v. Perry , 224 Ill.2d 312, ... 344, 864 N.E.2d 196, ... ...