People v. Falconer

• Decision Date: 28 April 1988
• Docket Number: No. 2-87-0044,2-87-0044
• Parties: , 119 Ill.Dec. 241 The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Phyllis FALCONER, Defendant-Appellant.
• Court: United States Appellate Court of Illinois

Page 903

522 N.E.2d 903

168 Ill.App.3d 618, 119 Ill.Dec. 241

The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Phyllis FALCONER, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 2-87-0044.

Appellate Court of Illinois Second District.

April 28, 1988.

Rehearing Denied May 27, 1988.

Charles A. Canning, Law Offices of Robert A. Chapski, Ltd., Elgin, Margaret Byrne, Sue L. Augustus, Bannister & Byrne, Chicago, for Phyllis Falconer.

Robert J. Morrow, Robert F. Casey, Kane County State's Attys., Geneva, William L. Browers, Deputy Director, State Attys. Appellate Prosecutor, Lori J. Miller, State's Attys. Appellate Prosecutor, Elgin, for the People.

Justice NASH delivered the opinion of the court:

After trial by jury defendant, Phyllis Falconer, was convicted of murder (Ill.Rev.Stat.1985, ch. 38, par. 9-1) and was sentenced to 24 years imprisonment. She appeals contending that: (1) she was not proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt because the evidence established self-defense; (2) the murder conviction should be reduced to voluntary manslaughter; (3) the prosecutor made improper closing argument and (4) she was denied effective assistance of counsel. We affirm.

At trial defendant testified that her husband, the victim, had been physically abusive to her over the course of their marriage. She had married Roger Falconer in 1949, divorced him on the ground of physical and mental cruelty in 1954, and remarried him in 1965. Defendant stated that on May 26, 1986, she awoke about 10 a.m. and had coffee. Roger was scrubbing the kitchen floor. According to defendant, Roger began yelling at her because he couldn't find a wax stripper for the floor. Defendant stated that Roger came over to her and shoved her against the kitchen counter, and tried to reach for some razor blades that were on the windowsill above the kitchen sink. Defendant said she put her arm on Roger's hand and said, "I have razor blades on the windowsill for my artwork. You're not getting the razor blade." Defendant testified that Roger then slapped her, and she picked up a knife and stabbed him. Roger grabbed his arm and ran down the hall to the bathroom. Defendant testified that she followed Roger, cleaned some blood off the bathroom wall, and tried to help Roger, who told her to call for help.

A tape recording of a call to emergency number 911 at 11:47 a.m. on May 26, 1986, was introduced into evidence by the State. On the tape defendant states that she needed paramedics fast and that she had stabbed her husband. When asked by the 911 dispatcher if she would harm anyone if they came to the house, defendant replied, "No. He was doing it to me."

Defendant's testimony relating to her husband's physical abuse of her was corroborated by the testimony of her son, Michael McGuire; her mother, Gladys Goodrich; her friends, June Taylor and Olga Camdon; and her psychiatrist, Dr. Marvin DeHaan.

Police officer Donald Shaw, who was the first officer to arrive at the Falconer home after defendant phoned 911, testified that defendant told her that Roger had hit her and she stabbed him twice. Defendant also said that Roger had been down 45 minutes and that the knife she used was on the kitchen table.

Rick McKiness, a deputy sheriff testified that defendant told him that her husband had slapped her on the face, but he saw no mark. Defendant also told the officer that she did not want medical assistance and had suffered no injuries. According to Deputy McKiness, defendant, while being escorted to the squad car, stated that the neighbors were probably wondering why she had not killed her husband sooner. He further testified that while en route to the jail defendant stated that she felt good about killing her husband and wished she had done it years ago.

Deputy sheriff Steven Fitzsimons testified that defendant said that Roger ran down the hallway after being stabbed, that she didn't think she could catch him, but when she did catch him, she stabbed him.

Dr. Larry Blum, a pathologist, testified that Roger's body had a stab wound on the right forearm and one on the right side of the back. It was Dr. Blum's opinion that the wound on the right forearm was a defensive wound and that the back wound was five inches deep, and straight into the body. Dr. Blum opined that, given Roger's wounds, he would have remained conscious for 10 to 15 minutes after the stabbing and that the cause of death was hemorrhagic shock due to loss of blood from the stab wound to the back.

The jury was instructed, inter alia, as to both the offenses of murder and voluntary manslaughter and as to self-defense.

Defendant first contends that she was not proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt because the State failed to disprove her theory of self-defense. The State responds that the evidence establishes defendant's guilt of murder beyond a reasonable doubt. We agree with the State that the jury could conclude from the evidence that defendant did not act in self-defense.

Once a defendant has presented some evidence of self-defense, the State has the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt as to the issue of self-defense. (People v. Woods (1980), 81 Ill.2d 537, 542, 43 Ill.Dec. 733, 410 N.E.2d 866.) A person is justified in using deadly force only if she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm (Ill.Rev.Stat.1985, ch. 38, par. 7-1), and the right of self-defense does not justify an act of retaliation or revenge. ( Woods, 81 Ill.2d at 543, 43 Ill.Dec. 733, 410 N.E.2d 866.) The issue of self-defense is a question of fact to be decided by the jury, and its decision should not be disturbed unless the evidence is so unreasonable, improbable, or unsatisfactory as to raise a reasonable doubt of defendant's guilt. People v. Ingram (1983), 114 Ill.App.3d 740, 743, 70 Ill.Dec. 435, 449 N.E.2d 564; People v. Ellis (1982), 107 Ill.App.3d 603, 610, 437 N.E.2d 409, 437 N.E.2d 409.

Here, the jury was justified in rejecting defendant's theory of self-defense as it could rationally have concluded that defendant was not justified in using deadly force since, according to defendant's testimony, she twice stabbed Roger in response to his slapping her. There was no physical evidence to corroborate the assertion that defendant had been slapped by her husband, as she received no injuries as a result of the altercation with him, and defendant's statements to police after the stabbing suggest an intent to kill her husband. Moreover, the evidence establishes that defendant's husband died from a stab wound to his back, and the jury could have reasonably concluded that after stabbing her husband in the forearm she ran after him and stabbed him in the back. This conduct was not in self- defense, but rather suggests retaliation or revenge.

Defendant next contends that her conviction should be reduced to voluntary manslaughter because the evidence establishes that she acted under an unreasonable belief that her actions were necessary to defend herself, or that she acted under sudden and intense passion resulting from serious provocation. (Ill.Rev.Stat.1985, ch. 38, par. 9-2.) Whether a homicide constitutes murder or manslaughter is a question to be determined by the trier of fact, and a reviewing court's power to reduce a murder conviction to manslaughter should be exercised cautiously. People v. Greene (1987), 160 Ill.App.3d 1089, 1095-98, 112 Ill.Dec. 483, 513 N.E.2d 1092.

In this case there was ample evidence on which the jury could conclude that defendant had no basis, either reasonable or unreasonable, to fear for her safety. Defendant stabbed her husband twice, once in the back, in response to being slapped. He was unarmed, and the evidence shows that he did not seriously injure her. Although defendant points out that her husband was reaching for razor blades when she first stabbed him, the jury could have concluded that he wanted the razor blades to strip the wax off the floor.

Similarly, defe...