People v. D'Elia
| Decision Date | 13 August 2018 |
| Docket Number | NO. 4-16-0246,4-16-0246 |
| Citation | 2018 IL App (4th) 160246 -U |
| Parties | THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. FLORENCE A. D'ELIA, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
NOTICE
This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1).
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Sangamon County
Honorable Brian T. Otwell, Judge Presiding.
¶ 1 Held: The State's evidence was sufficient to prove defendant guilty of obstructing a peace officer, and defendant was not denied a fair trial.
¶ 2 In November 2014, the State charged defendant, Florence A. D'Elia, with one count of obstructing a peace officer (720 ILCS 5/31-1(a) (West 2014)). After a February 2016 trial, the jury found defendant guilty of the charge. Defendant filed a posttrial motion. At a joint April 2016 hearing, the Sangamon County circuit court denied defendant's posttrial motion and sentenced her to one year of conditional discharge.
¶ 3 Defendant appeals, asserting (1) the State's evidence was insufficient to prove her guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of obstructing a peace officer, and (2) she was denied a fair trial by improper remarks by the prosecutor during closing arguments. We affirm.
¶ 5 The State's November 2014 complaint alleged that, on October 21, 2014, defendant committed the offense of obstructing a peace officer, in that she knowingly obstructed the performance of Deputy Terry Roderick of an authorized act within his official capacity, being the investigation of a disturbance, by closing a door on Deputy Roderick's hand and thereby blocking Deputy Roderick's entry into the residence. In December 2015, the State amended its complaint to remove the language regarding defendant closing the door on Deputy Roderick's hand and preventing his entry and replaced it with language stating defendant ignored Deputy Roderick's verbal commands. The State later amended the complaint again by changing the date from October 21, 2014, to October 20, 2014.
¶ 6 In February 2016, the circuit court held defendant's jury trial. The State presented the testimony of Deputy Roderick. Defendant testified on her own behalf and presented the testimony of her son, Matthew D'Elia. Defendant also presented the written agreement between Matthew and his former girlfriend, Angela Martin, and three pictures of the boxes defendant had packed. The State recalled Deputy Roderick on rebuttal. The evidence relevant to the issues on appeal is set forth below.
¶ 7 Deputy Roderick testified that, around 11:30 a.m. on October 20, 2014, he was on patrol in Illiopolis, Illinois. He was wearing his Sangamon County sheriff's department issued uniform and was driving his department issued squad car that had lights on top and stated "Sheriff" on the side. While on patrol, he responded to a disturbance call at 208 Fifth Street in Illiopolis. The alleged disturbance was between defendant and Martin. Defendant and Martin had engaged in a verbal fight, and defendant had thrown a wedding dress. Defendant did not want Martin in the residence.
¶ 8 Deputy Roderick entered the residence to speak with defendant and get her side of the story. He needed the door to the residence to stay open to keep the scene and everyone involved safe. Keeping the door open allowed Deputy Roderick to keep an eye on the people outside in case they tried to come in or leave. His backup was coming from Springfield, Illinois, which was a "good 20 miles" away. Deputy Roderick explained defendant's actions as follows:
Deputy Roderick explained maybe three or four minutes elapsed between the time he arrived on the scene and entered the residence. When he entered he immediately tried to keep the door open and gave defendant multiple orders to keep the door open over a span of one to two minutes. He did not know the relationship between defendant and Martin. After he arrived and started his investigation, Deputy Roderick determined the home was the residence of Matthew and Martin. Martin's driver's license listed the address as her residence. He was not aware Matthew and Martin had broken up two days before and she was to remove her belongings from the residence. He believed defendant had some things packed up on the front porch. Defendant did not relate information about the boxes to him because she was very irate and screaming. Deputy Roderick believed defendant tried to close the door because she did not want another person toenter the residence.
¶ 9 Matthew testified he was the sole owner of the residence at 208 Fifth Street. Martin was not on the deed. The residence had a front and a back door, as well as an alarm system. The garage was detached from the home.
¶ 10 According to Matthew, he and Martin broke up on October 18, 2014. Before then, Martin's brother, Luke Hall, had tried to beat up Matthew. When he and Martin broke up, Matthew wrote up an agreement, under which Martin was to have her things removed from the property by October 19, 2014, and to not return to the property. Both Matthew and Martin signed the written agreement, which defendant presented as her exhibit No. 2. On October 19, 2014, Martin only removed a stereo from the property. Matthew contacted defendant to help him pack up Martin's belongings.
¶ 11 Matthew further testified defendant came over to his residence around 7:30 a.m. on October 20, 2014. She took Matthew's son to school and returned to the residence at 8 a.m. Before leaving for work, Matthew gave defendant the written agreement and told her not to let Martin in the residence. He also asked defendant to pack up Martin's things and put them in the garage. Around 10 a.m., Matthew received a telephone call from defendant, stating Martin had showed up at his residence earlier than expected. Matthew instructed defendant to hit the panic button on the alarm system if she felt threatened. While on the telephone with defendant, Matthew heard Martin and defendant exchange words. Martin wanted into the home to get her wedding dress, and Matthew instructed defendant not to let her inside. During the telephone call, Matthew could hear the panic alarm going off.
¶ 12 Defendant testified Martin was expected at Matthew's residence at 1 p.m. on October 20, 2014. While she was packing up Martin's things in the kitchen, defendant observedMartin enter the residence's garage. Defendant exited the residence to witness Martin taking her things, and Martin came out of the garage and started yelling about a wedding dress. Martin then tried to push her way into the house through the back door. Defendant got back inside the residence and locked the back door. She then went to the front window and observed Hall sitting in a taxi cab along with the cab driver. After talking with Matthew on the telephone, defendant got the wedding dress and took it outside to Martin. Martin refused to take the dress and hit defendant through the dress. Hall then started yelling about how defendant hit Martin. Defendant laid the wedding dress in the taxi cab and went inside the residence. She activated the panic alarm because Martin wanted in the home, Hall was present, and they were accusing her of doing things she had not done. Defendant testified Martin was drunk and belligerent.
¶ 13 According to defendant, she allowed Deputy Roderick into the residence and closed the door. She did not lock it. Deputy Roderick asked about the noise, and she told him it was a panic alarm. He asked her to turn it off, and she did so. According to defendant, as soon as she turned off the alarm, Martin started coming through the front door. Defendant ran to the front door and pushed on the door. She was not strong enough to keep it shut and lock it. Defendant testified Officer Roderick was five to six feet away from defendant. He told her to leave the door open and not to lock it. Defendant responded she was not to let Martin in the home. He told her to leave the door open a couple of times, and she continued to try to shut the door. Deputy Roderick then came over in between the door and defendant and grabbed the door. Defendant quit pushing on the door but continued to block the door with her body. Martin kept hitting defendant with the door, which made Deputy Roderick mad. Deputy Roderick then told defendant he was going to have to arrest her. Defendant denied knowingly attempting to obstruct Deputy Roderick. She did not follow Deputy Roderick's orders because she was trying to keep Mar-tin out of the residence. Defendant testified the amount of time from when Deputy Roderick entered the residence until her arrest was under a minute and a half. Defendant admitted Deputy Roderick was wearing his uniform and she knew he was a peace officer there to address the disturbance. She also admitted she knew Martin and Hall had accused her of battery.
¶ 14 On rebuttal, Deputy Roderick testified Martin was not trying to enter the residence. Martin was standing out by the taxi cab, approximately 20 to 30 feet away from the front door. After Deputy Roderick gave his verbal command not to close the door, defendant shut the door on his hand. He was able to get his hand free and place her under arrest. Deputy...
To continue reading
Request your trial