People v. Craig

Decision Date12 September 2002
Docket NumberNo. 1-01-1993.,1-01-1993.
PartiesThe PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Calvin CRAIG, Defendant-Appellant.
CourtUnited States Appellate Court of Illinois

Patrick A. Tuite, of Arnstein & Lehr, Chicago, for Defendant-Appellant.

Richard A. Devine, State's Attorney of Cook County, Chicago (Renee Goldfarb, Alan J. Spellberg, Aaron R. Bond, of counsel), for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Justice GREIMAN delivered the opinion of the court:

Defendant Calvin Craig was indicted, inter alia, for the first degree murder of Christopher Smith and Latisha Midderhoff, two counts of aggravated discharge of a firearm, and the aggravated battery of Antwon Bishop and Quintius Taylor with a firearm. After a bench trial, he was found guilty of the murder of Smith, the two counts of aggravated discharge of a firearm, and the aggravated battery of Bishop and Taylor with a firearm, but not guilty of the murder of Midderhoff. The court sentenced the defendant to 45 years' imprisonment for murder, 15 years for the aggravated battery of Bishop with a firearm, and 15 years for the aggravated battery of Taylor with a firearm. In addition, the court merged the two counts of aggravated discharge of a firearm into the two counts of aggravated battery with a firearm.

In its findings of fact, the trial court ordered the defendant's 45 year sentence for his murder conviction to be served consecutive to his 15 year sentence for the aggravated battery of Bishop with a firearm, and ordered his 15 year sentence for the aggravated battery of Taylor with a firearm to be served concurrently. However, the court did not mention to which sentence the sentence for the aggravated battery of Taylor was to be served concurrently. The mittimus in this case reiterates that the defendant was sentenced to 45 years for the murder charge, 15 years for the aggravated battery of Bishop with a firearm, and 15 years for the aggravated battery of Taylor with a firearm; and that the two counts of aggravated discharge of a firearm merged into the two aggravated battery counts. The mittimus then states that the sentence for the aggravated battery of Taylor was to be served concurrently with the murder sentence, but states nothing with regard to whether the sentence for the aggravated battery of Bishop was to be served concurrently or consecutively to either of the other two sentences. Because of the mittimus, the State asserts, the Illinois Department of Corrections now believes that all of the defendant's sentences are to run concurrently. Defendant now appeals, and for the reasons that follow, we affirm in part and vacate in part.

At trial, the following events were related by a number of witnesses. On August 20, 1998, at approximately 3:40 p.m., Bishop picked up Taylor and Smith in a white conversion van at the corner of 69th Street and Halsted Avenue in Chicago. While Bishop drove, Smith sat in the front seat with Taylor in the backseat behind the driver. Smith, Taylor, and Bishop were all friends and all belonged to the Black Disciples street gang. After stopping briefly at Smith's house, they drove around the Englewood area looking for a "weed spot" where they could buy some marijuana.

Around 4 p.m., they were driving north on Green Street when Bishop stopped the van at a stop sign on the corner of 71st and Green Streets. On the east side of Green Street, between 71st and 70th Streets, stood a man leaning on a parked white car. Meanwhile, a man purported to be the defendant walked out of a building on the east side of the street, crossed the street to the west side, stood next to a parked blue van, and looked southbound toward the white van that Bishop was driving. As Bishop began to drive through the intersection and alongside the blue van, the defendant allegedly brandished a gun and started shooting at the driver's side of the white van while the other man started shooting at the passenger side. When the defendant allegedly began to shoot, he was approximately three to four feet away from Bishop's van.

During the shooting, a bullet struck Smith in his back, continued upward, and lodged in the right side of his tongue. Bishop, who was also hit in the chest and in the arm, accelerated northbound and then turned east onto 69th Street, hitting some parked cars along the way because he had ducked his head after the shooting began. At some point during the shooting, further up the street, Latisha Midderhoff was also hit in the chest with a bullet. After turning the van onto 69th Street, Bishop and Taylor saw blood coming out of Smith's mouth and realized that he was badly hurt. They then drove to St. Bernard's Hospital, where Smith and Bishop were admitted to the emergency room and treated. While Bishop and Smith were being treated, Taylor noticed that defendant's cousin, Pierre Freeman, who was also a Black Disciple, had entered the hospital. Fearing an attack from Freeman, Taylor got the keys to Bishop's van and fled the hospital.

At approximately 4:45 p.m. that same afternoon, Officer Peter Larcher was instructed to go to the area of 7000 South Green Street regarding a shooting that occurred in that neighborhood. In the course of his investigation, Officer Larcher photographed bloodstains in front of 6844 Green Street and recovered a 9 millimeter cartridge case in a vacant lot at 6951 South Green Street. He then photographed a car that had taken firearms damage in front of 7047 South Green Street and recovered a bullet from the vestibule of a residence at 7023 South Green Street. He then proceeded south on Green Street and eventually recovered 16 cartridge cases from the general vicinity. Officer Larcher then concluded his on-site investigation and proceeded to St. Bernard's Hospital, where he recovered a T-shirt and discovered blood on the driveway to the emergency entrance. Some time that afternoon, Smith died of his injuries and Bishop was transferred to Cook County Hospital.

That afternoon, Detectives O'Brian and Murray, who were also assigned to the case, went to 6902 South Emerald Avenue, where police had recovered the white van that Bishop was driving. Detectives O'Brian and Murray noticed that the exterior of the van was damaged by numerous bullet holes and that there was a large amount of blood on the front passenger seat as well as on the interior and exterior of the passenger door. They then notified Officer Larcher and instructed him to process the van.

While Officer Larcher processed the van and proceeded with his own forensic investigation, Detectives O'Brian and Murray went to the location of the shooting. When they arrived, they spoke with the beat officers on site to get an idea of what had happened. They then searched the area for physical evidence and canvassed the area in an attempt to locate witnesses. The detectives next drove to Cook County Hospital, where they were able to speak briefly with Bishop for approximately 10 to 15 minutes. In that conversation, Bishop was able to describe the two shooters. He identified the first shooter as a black male, 5 feet 7 inches to 5 feet 10 inches tall, approximately 25 years of age with a medium complexion and a fade-type haircut. He described the second shooter as also being a black male with the same general characteristics as the first shooter, except that this person had a light complexion. The detectives then began searching for Taylor.

At about that same time, Detective Griffin began investigating the shooting of Latisha Midderhoff, which had occurred in front of the building at 6844 Green Street. To that end, he went to Christ Hospital and learned that she had died as a result of a gunshot wound that she had sustained. After viewing Midderhoff's body and speaking with the medical personnel who had rendered assistance to Midderhoff, Detective Griffin recovered and inventoried a bullet that they had found in her clothing.

On August 24, 1998, Brian Mayland, an expert in the field of firearms and a forensic scientist with the Illinois State Police, received inventories from the murder investigations of Midderhoff and Smith. One of the inventory bags held three sealed envelopes. The first envelope contained six 9 millimeter cartridge cases, the second contained nine 9 millimeter Luger cartridge cases, and the third held one 9 millimeter Luger cartridge case. After performing tests on these 16 cartridge cases, Mayland was able to determine that 15 of the cartridge cases were fired from the same gun. He was unable, however, to determine that the one remaining cartridge case was fired from the same gun as the other 15.

A second inventory bag also contained three envelopes. Two of the envelopes held one fired bullet each while the third contained a metal fragment. Mayland performed tests on the two bullets and determined that they were each fired from a 9-millimeter gun. Mayland then performed tests on the metal fragment in the third envelope and determined that the fragment was consistent with a lead bullet core. However, because the bullet was so deformed, he was unable to determine its class characteristic to determine whether it was fired from a 9-millimeter gun.

On September 12, 1998, police officers James Weyforth and Jerry Pentimore of the Chicago police department had occasion to stop a vehicle driven by the defendant, who presented his license. Leaving his license with the officers, the defendant fled from the scene at a high rate of speed. During the chase, a gun was thrown from the window of the vehicle which was later recovered and found to be a 9-millimeter weapon. The gun was fully loaded at the time and subsequently was inventoried in the police department.

At trial, Mayland testified that the bullets found at the scene of the offense could have been fired from that gun, but that he could not make a conclusive identification. Specifically, he stated that,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
44 cases
  • People v. Bannister
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • December 4, 2007
    ... ... See 210 Ill.2d R. 341(h)(7); People v. Colon, 225 Ill.2d 125, 157, 310 Ill. Dec. 396, 866 N.E.2d 207 (2007) ...         Moreover, the merits of the defendant's argument have been rejected by ... 880 N.E.2d 624 ... People v. Craig, 334 Ill.App.3d 426, 268 Ill.Dec. 206, 778 N.E.2d 192 (2002). As observed in Craig, section 115-10.1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (725 ILCS 5/115-.10.1 (West 2004)) specifically authorizes the admission of prior inconsistent statements as substantive evidence and dictates that the court did ... ...
  • People v. Cox
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • November 21, 2007
    ...evidence. People v. Thomas, 354 Ill.App.3d 868, 880, 290 Ill.Dec. 316, 821 N.E.2d 628 (2004); People v. Craig, 334 Ill.App.3d 426, 439, 268 Ill.Dec. 206, 778 N.E.2d 192 (2002); People v. Curtis, 296 Ill.App.3d 991, 999, 231 Ill.Dec. 380, 696 N.E.2d 372 (1998). By its verdict, the jury deter......
  • People v. Davis
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • June 29, 2018
    ...(citing People v. Curtis , 296 Ill. App. 3d 991, 999, 231 Ill.Dec. 380, 696 N.E.2d 372 (1998) ).¶ 47 In People v. Craig , 334 Ill. App. 3d 426, 268 Ill.Dec. 206, 778 N.E.2d 192 (2002), also cited by the State, the court held, citing Morrow and Curtis , that "additional corroboration is not ......
  • Cordeck Sales v. Construction Systems
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • March 31, 2008
    ...a hearing into whether a witness has `reasonable cause to apprehend danger from a direct answer.'" People v. Craig, 334 Ill.App.3d 426, 446, 268 Ill.Dec. 206, 778 N.E.2d 192 (2002), quoting Hoffman, 341 U.S. at 486, 71 S.Ct. at 818, 95 L.Ed. at A party in a civil case may invoke his privile......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Witness
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Trial Objections
    • May 5, 2022
    ...to incriminate himself , and respondent did not act consistently with his claimed strategy in not testifying. People v. Craig , 778 N.E.2d 192, 208 (Ill. App. Ct. 2002). A witness may be denied the privilege against self-incrimination when it is perfectly clear, from a careful consideration......

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