People v. Fields

Decision Date27 September 2013
Docket NumberNo. 2–12–0945.,2–12–0945.
Citation375 Ill.Dec. 480,997 N.E.2d 791,2013 IL App (2d) 120945
PartiesThe PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. Tuan C. FIELDS, Defendant–Appellant.
CourtUnited States Appellate Court of Illinois

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Thomas A. Lilien, Bruce Kirkham, State Appellate Defender's Office, Elgin, for appellant.

Joseph H. McMahon, State's Attorney, St. Charles (Lawrence M. Bauer, Victoria E. Jozef, State's Attorneys Appellate Prosecutor's Office, of counsel), for the People.

OPINION

Justice JORGENSEN delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion.

¶ 1 In 2008, a jury found defendant, Tuan C. Fields, accountable for the acts of his codefendant, Darvin Henderson, and convicted him of first-degree murder (720 ILCS 5/9–1(a)(1) (West 2006)) and attempted first-degree murder (720 ILCS 5/8–4(a), 9–1(a) (West 2006)). The court sentenced defendant to consecutive terms of 25 years' and 8 years' imprisonment, respectively. Defendant appeals, arguing, as to his attempted first-degree murder conviction only, that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction. In addition, defendant argues that trial counsel provided ineffective assistance where he did not object to the State's introduction of gang-affiliation evidence. Finally, defendant argues that we should remand for a new hearing on his pro se posttrial motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, because the State's participation in the preliminary inquiry into his claims rendered the hearing adversarial. For the following reasons, we reject defendant's sufficiency-of-the-evidence and ineffective-assistance arguments, but we agree that he should receive a new hearing on his pro se motion alleging ineffective assistance. Accordingly, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand with directions.

¶ 2 I. BACKGROUND

¶ 3 On April 30, 2007, Henderson fired a weapon, allegedly given to him by defendant, in the stairwell of an apartment building in Aurora. Rashod Waldrop died as a result of gunshot wounds and Jonathan Phillips sustained a head wound. On appeal, defendant argues that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his attempted murder conviction, because the State did not establish beyond a reasonable doubt that Phillips' injury was caused by a firearm, as charged, and, thus, that there was any intent to kill. As defendant does not challenge on appeal the evidence regarding his accountability for the crimes, or the sufficiency of the evidence on his murder conviction, the following factual synopsis does not focus on the trial evidence on those points. Rather, we provide general background and detail only the evidence and events relevant to defendant's appellate arguments.

¶ 4 A. Trial Evidence

¶ 5 At trial, in opening statements, the State explained to the jury that the parties involved in the incidents at issue belonged to the Gangster Disciples street gang or various factions, specifically, the “Low Ends” and the “Twelve Hundreds.”

¶ 6 Robert Moore testified that he knew and was “like brothers with defendant, who was known by the street name Don Juan.” He also knew Henderson, who was known by the street name “Bling.” Phillips and Waldrop were known by the street names “J–Hood” and “Turtle,” respectively. Moore, Henderson, Phillips, and Waldrop were all members of the Gangster Disciples (defendant was a member of the Maniac Latin Disciples, a gang described as like “cousins” with the Gangster Disciples). Henderson, however, was part of the Twelve Hundreds faction of the gang, while Phillips and Waldrop were part of the Low Ends faction. Moore and defendant did not belong to factions.

¶ 7 Moore agreed that, on April 29, 2007, at a barbecue at Farnsworth Park in Aurora, a problem started “between the two groups.” When Henderson arrived at the barbecue, Henderson and the Low Ends (specifically Waldrop and Phillips) got into a fight. The fight became physical and Phillips snatched a gold chain off of Henderson's neck. Defendant was not involved in the fight. The fight broke up when Michael Townes (gang affiliation, if any, unknown) fired a shot from a silver, .357–caliber revolver into the air. Everyone scattered, and Moore, Phillips, and Waldrop went to a gas station. Defendant did not go. According to Moore, Henderson eventually arrived at the gas station and walked up to Phillips and Waldrop and said, “I'm getting my chain back” or “Let me get my chain.” Waldrop responded, “Get it in blood,” and Phillips ripped the chain into pieces. Henderson got into his car and drove away.

¶ 8 That evening, there was a party held in different apartments at 430 River Street in Aurora. The apartment building has a secured elevator lobby, and a door off of the lobby that leads to a stairwell. At the party, as defendant and Henderson exited a room, defendant said to Moore, “watch what me and Bling about to do.” Moore saw Townes give defendant the gun that he had fired in the park. Defendant put the gun in his waistband and left. According to Moore, defendant later returned to the party and said, “Everybody get out, J–Hood and Turtle just got knocked out.”

¶ 9 The evidence further reflected that defendant and Henderson were seen outside the building, with Henderson putting on white gloves and wearing a hooded sweatshirt. Defendant told a witness, We on some bullshit.” Later, inside at the party, defendant said, “follow me,” and led multiple people, including Phillips and Waldrop, out of the apartment, down a hallway, and into a stairwell. While descending the stairs, Phillips and Waldrop passed by defendant and then Henderson fired gunshots. Everybody ran. Henderson was seen running out of the building with gloves on and a gun in his right hand.

¶ 10 Officer Pete Wullbrandt responded to the scene; there was screaming and a large crowd outside. When he entered the building he saw Phillips lying in a large pool of blood on the floor, between the elevators and a door leading to a stairwell. According to Wullbrandt, Phillips was unconscious, bleeding, and had what “appeared to be a gunshot [wound] on the top of his head. Officer Don Flowers also arrived on the scene, which he described as “chaos. A lot of people running around, yelling somebody had been shot.” Flowers entered the lobby and saw Phillips lying on the floor, bleeding from his head. Bullet holes, fragments, and jackets were found in the stairwell and near the elevators outside the stairwell door. The bullet jackets reflected that they could have been fired from a .357 class of firearm. No casings were found, which was consistent with the weapon being a revolver.

¶ 11 Waldrop died in surgery at the hospital. He had sustained three gunshot wounds and blunt force trauma to the back of his head. Specifically, Waldrop had four lacerations on the top of the back of his head, ranging from one-fourth of an inch to three-fourths of an inch in length and, under the longest laceration, a skull fracture. The forensic pathologist testified that, hypothetically speaking, the lacerations could have come from Waldrop being pistol-whipped.

¶ 12 Defendant's friend, Earl James, testified in exchange for a deal with the State. James had known defendant for several years, assumed defendant was a Gangster Disciple, and he had spent time with defendant in the same jail cell. While there, defendant told James that he gave Henderson the gun while they were outside the apartment building and that he then he returned to the apartment party while Henderson went into the stairwell. Defendant told James that he had escorted Phillips and Waldrop to the stairwell, but that they proceeded downstairs in front of him. Defendant heard gunshots, went downstairs and “looked at the two that was shot in the doorway,” and then went back upstairs. Defendant told James that he did not think they would get shot.

¶ 13 Officer William Rowley interviewed defendant. According to Rowley, during the interview, defendant recounted that, after hearing the gunshots, he exited the stairwell, “saw that two people had been shot,” and returned up the stairs.

¶ 14 Officer Kevin Jenkins also interviewed defendant, who initially denied any involvement in the shootings. Defendant later admitted that he knew of the dispute between Henderson and the Low Ends where someone snatched a chain from Henderson's neck. Defendant admitted that he had obtained Townes' gun while inside the building that night. He conceded that Henderson was the shooter and that he admitted Henderson into the elevator lobby through a secured door; Henderson then entered the stairwell and defendant took an elevator upstairs to a party where Waldrop and Phillips were present. Defendant told Jenkins that, after leaving the party, Waldrop asked defendant to walk him downstairs. After entering the stairwell, defendant heard shots being fired as people reached the bottom of the stairs. Defendant saw Henderson “shooting at the two subjects” at the bottom of the stairs.1

¶ 15 In closing arguments, the State commented:

“All we have to do is show that he aided or abetted in some way. And how do we know that? How do we know, how have we proven to you that he aided or abetted? We've done it through his actions and through his words, spoken to his friends and his fellow Gangster Disciples that night and afterwards.”

The State then noted that the evidence reflected that defendant had commented, We on some bullshit” and “watch what me and Bling about to do,” and that he obtained and then gave Henderson a gun. The State further argued that the video recordings showed defendant giving Henderson access to the building and then, by leading them to the stairwell, giving Henderson access to the victims.

¶ 16 Defense counsel, in turn, commented in closing, “Why would [defendant] be angry? Why would he want to conspire with anybody to have what were his friends, Waldrop and Phillips, murdered? It doesn't make sense.”

¶ 17 The jury convicted defendant of first-degree murder and attempted...

To continue reading

Request your trial
23 cases
  • People v. Robinson
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • June 26, 2015
    ...Morgan, 212 Ill.2d 148, 155, 288 Ill.Dec. 166, 817 N.E.2d 524 (2004) ).¶ 73 In Jolly, our supreme court cited with approval People v. Fields, 2013 IL App (2d) 120945, ¶ 40, 375 Ill.Dec. 480, 997 N.E.2d 791, which held: “virtually no opportunity for State participation is offered” during the......
  • People v. Jackson, 1–13–3741.
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • March 10, 2016
    ...appellate decisions likewise adopted the remedy of remand to a different judge in a similar context. Id. ¶ 35 (quoting People v. Fields, 2013 IL App (2d) 120945, ¶ 42, 375 Ill.Dec. 480, 997 N.E.2d 791, citing Cabrales, 325 Ill.App.3d at 6, 258 Ill.Dec. 479, 756 N.E.2d 461 ); see also People......
  • People v. Lewis
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • February 27, 2015
    ...a Krankel hearing is somewhat flexible.” Flemming, 2014 IL App (1st) 111925, ¶ 84, 384 Ill.Dec. 743, 17 N.E.3d 725 (citing People v. Fields, 2013 IL App (2d) 120945, ¶ 40, 375 Ill.Dec. 480, 997 N.E.2d 791 ). “[T]he trial court may consider any facial insufficiency of the defendant's allegat......
  • People v. Jackson
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • September 11, 2018
    ...393 Ill.Dec. 826, 35 N.E.3d 218. ¶ 84 The procedure to be followed at a preliminary Krankel inquiry "is somewhat flexible." People v. Fields , 2013 IL App (2d) 120945, ¶ 40, 375 Ill.Dec. 480, 997 N.E.2d 791. It is appropriate for the court to consider its own knowledge of counsel's performa......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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