People v. Fisher
| Decision Date | 13 February 2013 |
| Docket Number | No. 1-11-0949,1-11-0949 |
| Citation | 2013 IL App (1st) 110949 |
| Parties | THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. QUINTON FISHER, 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(3)(1).
Appeal from the
Circuit Court of
Cook County.
¶ 1Held: When the record on appeal does not show whether police recorded all interrogations of the defendant in a murder case, the defendant has not proved that his counsel provided ineffective assistance when counsel did not move to suppress some video recorded interviews with the defendant.The defendant also has not proved that counsel should have moved to suppress statements for violation of Miranda, where the record does not show the exact warnings police gave for interrogations preceding the video recorded interview presented at trial.
¶ 2 Following a bench trial, the trial court found the defendant, Quinton Fisher, guilty ofmurdering Lydia Houston.On appeal, Fisher argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because his attorney did not move to suppress statements Fisher made to police.We find that Fisher has not presented a sufficient record to show that the trial court should have suppressed the statements if Fisher's counsel had moved to suppress.Fisher also has not overcome the presumption that counsel had a sound strategic reason for deciding not to move to suppress the statements.Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's judgment, and direct the trial court to correct the mittimus to reflect the correct credit for presentencing custody and to show the entry of judgment on the count on which the court found Fisher guilty.
¶ 4 On December 30, 2007, Lanysha Houston dropped off her month-old daughter, Lydia, at the home of Lydia's father, Fisher.Fisher had some guests over that evening, and the guests played with Lydia for a while.Not long after the guests left, Lydia stopped breathing.Fisher spoke on the phone with Lanysha and with one of the friends who had visited that evening.Fisher took Lydia to the nearest hospital.A doctor at the hospital found that Lydia had suffered a skull fracture that went completely across her head.Lydia also suffered a subgaleal hemorrhage and a subarachnoid hemorrhage.Her brain swelled up to such an extent that oxygen could not get into her brain.The hospital placed Lydia on life support that kept her breathing and her heart beating.
¶ 5 Police interviewed Fisher at the hospital on December 31, 2007.Lydia died on December 31, 2007.Police conducted further interviews with Fisher over the following days.They recorded some of the interviews.On February 6, 2008, a grand jury indicted Fisher on two counts of murder: one for intentionally killing Lydia, and a second for killing her, knowing that his acts created a strongprobability of death or great bodily harm.
¶ 6The parties engaged in extensive discovery.The prosecution disclosed its intention to use video recordings of interviews held on January 7 and 8, 2008.Defense counsel did not move to suppress the video recordings.
¶ 7 At trial, the medical examiner detailed the extensive injuries and testified that blunt force trauma to Lydia's head caused her death.The extensive injuries resulted from a "tremendous amount of force."Lydia had not merely suffered a shaking, a fall, or a throw onto a hard bed.In the medical examiner's opinion, throwing Lydia hard against a wall, head first, could have caused the trauma she suffered.
¶ 8 The officer who interviewed Fisher at the hospital testified that Fisher said he found Lydia unresponsive on the bed, and he decided to take her to the hospital.
¶ 9The prosecutor then showed the two promised videos.At the start of the first video, the officer alluded to a prior interview, then reminded Fisher of his rights.Fisher answered that he knew he had a right to remain silent, and that the State could use against him anything he said; he knew he had the right to an attorney, and that the court would appoint one for him if he could not afford one.The same officer repeated the same admonishments at the start of the second interview played in court.The tape showed that Fisher cried a great deal during the two interviews and expressed deep remorse.In the course of the two interviews, Fisher said that on December 30, 2007, Lydia cried after the guests left, and he once raised her over his head and slammed her onto the bed.She bounced against the wall and curled up.He grabbed Lydia's leg, shook her, and said, "don't die."
¶ 10 Defense counsel argued that Fisher acted recklessly, not intentionally.Fisher's attorney reliedpartly on the statements Fisher made and the remorse Fisher showed in the recorded interview.
¶ 11The court found Fisher guilty of murdering Lydia by inflicting blunt force trauma, knowing that his acts created a strong probability of death or great bodily harm.The court denied Fisher's posttrial motion and sentenced him to 22 years in prison.Fisher now appeals.
¶ 14The State has appended to its brief many pages of materials never presented to the trial court.These "matters not properly in the record will not be considered on review."Jenkins v. Wu, 102 Ill. 2d 468, 483(1984).
¶ 16 Fisher argues that his counsel provided ineffective assistance when he failed to move to suppress Fisher's statements.In particular, Fisher argues that counsel should have moved to suppress (1) the statement Fisher made at the hospital on December 31, 2007, because police did not make a video recording of the questioning; (2) the video recorded statements Fisher made after making statements that police failed to video record; and (3) the video recorded statements that include inadequate Miranda admonishments.
¶ 17We use familiar standards to review claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.To prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, "[a]defendant must show that (1) trial counsel's representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, and (2)[h]e was prejudiced by the deficient performance."People v. Haynes, 408 Ill. App. 3d 684, 689(2011).This court presumes that counsel provided reasonable professional assistance, and the defendant must overcome thepresumption that counsel had sound strategic reasons for adopting his course of action.People v. Albanese, 104 Ill. 2d 504, 526(1984).
¶ 18 Under Section 103-2.1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure(Code)(725 ILCS 5/103-2.1(West 2008)), police must make an accurate electronic recording of any interrogation that occurs as part of a murder investigation, and if the State subjects a murder defendant to an unrecorded custodial interrogation, "then any statements made by the defendant during or following that non-recorded custodial interrogation, even if otherwise in compliance with this Section, are presumed inadmissible."(Emphasis added.)725 ILCS 5/103-2.1(d)(West 2008).However, the statute does not preclude the use of an unrecorded statement "given at a time when the interrogators are unaware that a death has in fact occurred."725 ILCS 5/103-2.1(e)(viii)(West 2008).
¶ 19 The police officer who interviewed Fisher in the hospital on December 31, 2007, the day Lydia died, testified that after he spoke to Fisher, he learned that the hospital had decided to transfer Lydia to another hospital for further treatment.Fisher presented no evidence to contradict the inference that the interrogator did not know Lydia had died, even if she had actually died before the interrogation.Thus, Section 103-2.1 of the Code does not mandate suppression of the statements Fisher made to police in the hospital on December 31, 2007.Counsel's decision not to file a futile motion to suppress those statements does not show ineffective assistance.SeePeople v. Patterson, 217 Ill. 2d 407, 438(2005).
¶ 20 Next, Fisher contends that his attorney should have moved to suppress the video recording of the January 7 and 8 interviews.At the start of the January 7 interview, the interrogator referred to an interview that took place on January 6.No evidence in the record shows whether policerecorded the January 6 interview, which took place a week after Lydia died.If police did not record the prior interviews, section 103-2.1(d) of the Code would provide grounds for suppression of the statements introduced at trial.725 ILCS 5/103-2.1(d)(West 2008).Although the record on appeal does not show that police recorded the prior interviews, it also does not show that police failed to record the prior interviews.Thus,...
To continue reading
Request your trial