People v. Hart

Decision Date07 April 2005
Docket NumberNo. 97958.,97958.
Citation214 Ill.2d 490,828 N.E.2d 260,293 Ill.Dec. 290
PartiesThe PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Appellant, v. Eric L. HART, Appellee.
CourtIllinois Supreme Court

Lisa Madigan, Attorney General, Springfield, and Scott Rueter, State's Attorney, Decatur (Gary Feinerman, Solicitor General, Linda D. Woloshin and Colleen M. Griffin, Assistant Attorneys General, Chicago, and Norbert J. Goetten, Robert J. Biderman and David E. Mannchen, of the Office of the State's Attorneys Appellate Prosecutor, Springfield, of counsel), for the People.

Daniel D. Yuhas, Deputy Defender, and Keleigh L. Biggins, Assistant Defender, of the Office of the State Appellate Defender, Springfield, for appellee.

Justice KARMEIER delivered the opinion of the court:

Defendant, Eric Hart, was charged in the circuit court of Macon County with armed robbery and aggravated fleeing or attempting to elude a police officer, pursuant to section 18-2(a) of the Criminal Code of 1961 (720 ILCS 5/18-2(a) (West 2000)) and section 11-204.1 of the Illinois Vehicle Code (625 ILCS 5/11-204.1 (West 2000)). A jury found defendant guilty of both offenses, and defendant was subsequently sentenced to concurrent terms of 20 and 3 years' imprisonment, with credit for 369 days time served. Defendant appealed, arguing he was denied a fair trial when the prosecutor elicited testimony that he attempted to plea bargain and commented on that attempt in closing argument. With one justice dissenting, the appellate court agreed, reversing defendant's convictions. 345 Ill.App.3d 822, 281 Ill.Dec. 343, 803 N.E.2d 964. We allowed the State's petition for leave to appeal (177 Ill.2d R. 315(a)), and we now reverse the judgment of the appellate court.

BACKGROUND

Defendant was found guilty at the conclusion of a two-day jury trial. We summarize the evidence elicited and the arguments advanced during defendant's trial to the extent necessary to understand the issues presented.

Brian Nash testified he was working at a Clark Oil gas station located at Oakland Avenue and Ravina Park Road in Decatur, Illinois, at approximately 5:30 a.m. on May 20, 2001, when a man came in wearing panty hose over his head and robbed Nash at gunpoint. The robber directed Nash to open the cash register and give him the money. Nash complied, handing the man an unspecified amount of money in denominations of $1 and $5 dollar bills. After the man left, Nash called the police. Nash described the robber as a black male in his twenties, approximately 5 feet 11 inches tall, weighing about 160 to 180 pounds, and wearing a black or blue Starter shirt and blue jeans. The police arrived within a minute of his call, and Nash gave them a general description of the robber. Subsequently, Nash was taken to the location where a suspect had been arrested and identified the clothing the suspect was wearing as that worn by the robber. Because of the panty hose the robber wore on his head, Nash had not seen the robber's face. Nash later gave the police the gas station's video camera surveillance tape. That tape was subsequently admitted as evidence. Nash identified a handgun found outside the station as the one used by the perpetrator.

Decatur police officers Toby Williams and Steve Young testified regarding their pursuit and eventual apprehension of defendant. Officer Williams stated that he received a description of the robber over his radio and observed defendant, who matched that description, driving in the opposite direction on Home Park Avenue near Ramsey. The location described is about midway on Home Park between Ravina Park Road and Division Street. Williams turned his car around and followed defendant. At some point, Williams was joined by Officer Young, who had first encountered defendant at the intersection of Home Park and Center Street. When the officers activated their emergency lights, defendant's car accelerated. In the course of the pursuit, defendant's vehicle reached estimated speeds of between 50 and 70 miles per hour in an area with a posted speed limit of 30 miles per hour. Ultimately, defendant lost control of his vehicle and ran up into the yard of a residence, coming to rest against a downed tree. Defendant got out of the car and started running, but was quickly caught and, after brief resistance, was taken into custody. Defendant had two $5 bills and six $1 bills on his person.

Officers Lonnie Lewellyn and Brian Kaylor testified that they drove Nash to the location where defendant was apprehended and, though Nash could not positively identify the defendant because the robber had worn panty hose over his head, Nash did say that defendant had the same build and clothing as the offender. At trial, Kaylor identified the clothing worn by defendant: a pair of blue jeans, a black long-sleeved T-shirt with a Starter logo on the front, a white T-shirt, and black tennis shoes. The clothing worn by defendant when he was arrested matched that worn by the robber as seen on the station's surveillance videotape. Officer Lewellyn inventoried the contents of defendant's vehicle and found, on the driver's side floorboard, a pellet gun and $132 in loose currency. Officers Lewellyn and Steve Jostes searched the area around the gas station and recovered a pair of nylon stockings and a .22-caliber pistol in a grassy area nearby. No identifiable fingerprints were found on the handgun.

Former Decatur police detective Michael Beck testified that he interviewed defendant on May 20, 2001, at the Macon County jail. Beck advised defendant of his rights, and defendant "agreed to make a statement." Beck said: "He told me initially that he found out when he was arrested he had a warrant on file that he thought had been taken care of." Beck then told defendant the reason he was there was to interview defendant about an armed robbery and he knew defendant was involved. Beck stated:

"He did not deny being involved but asked me what I could do for him if he cooperated. I advised him at that time I couldn't make any promises to him if he cooperated; however, I would contact the State's Attorney's Office and advise them of his cooperation."

No objection was interposed to the foregoing testimony. Beck testified defendant then asked to make a phone call to his mother. Beck stepped out of the room for a moment so defendant could talk to his mother in private, and, after a short time, reentered the room and spoke to defendant's mother, explaining defendant's circumstances. Defendant indicated he wanted to pray with his mother, which he did. Afterward, defendant said he wanted to think about whether he wanted to talk to Beck or not and advised Beck he would notify him if he wished to make a statement. Beck said he never heard from defendant again.

On cross-examination, Beck acknowledged that defendant had not admitted to being involved in the robbery. Defense counsel then asked, "He just said he was thinking about making a statement to you?" Beck reiterated: "What he said was, he asked me what I could do for him if he cooperated and I told him and he made no other statement regarding that." Prior to concluding his cross-examination, counsel sought to further clarify for the jury the extent to which defendant might have implicated himself:

"Q. He hasn't made a statement one way or the other concerning his involvement or non-involvement with this robbery. Is that correct?
A. That is correct."

Defendant presented an "alibi" defense. Defendant's girlfriend, Jennifer O'Neil, testified that she lived in Decatur, and defendant often spent the night at her residence. O'Neil stated that defendant stayed at her house on the evening of May 19, 2001, and got up the next morning at 5:30 a.m., "as usual." However, she did not know when he left her residence that day. Defendant's mother testified that he "normally" came to her house "three or four" mornings a week to feed her dogs.

Defendant testified that he stayed at O'Neil's residence the night of May 19, 2001, and got up around 5 or 5:30 a.m. on the day of May 20. At some time unspecified, defendant left O'Neil's residence in his 1984 Oldsmobile. Defendant stated he was en route to his mother's house when the police started following him. After about a block, they activated their lights. Defendant admitted he "kept going." He said he fled because he "didn't have [a] license" and "had a warrant." Defendant also claimed he knew he was going to be arrested, and he was trying to make it to the house of an acquaintance because he "didn't want the car to get towed away off the side of the road."

According to defendant, his vehicle was struck from behind during the police chase, which caused him to lose control of the vehicle. He then hit a mailbox and his vehicle came to rest on a log in someone's front yard. Defendant said he knew he was going to be arrested, and he was scared, so he jumped out of the car and ran. He was apprehended a short distance away.

Defendant admitted he owned the "BB gun" found on the floor of his car. He further acknowledged there were numerous bills in $1 and $5 denominations seized upon his arrest, though he stated the money was on his person, not in his car. Defendant addressed the presence of numerous $1 and $5 bills, saying they were the fruits of his employment as a barber. He said he charged $5 for a child's haircut and $8 for an adult.

On cross-examination, defendant insisted he had $148, in small denominations, folded up in his back pocket at the time of his arrest. He maintained that he received that money for cutting hair. The following exchange then ensued between the prosecutor and the defendant.

"Q. Whose hair did you cut the day before?
A. That was so long ago. I mean, I can't tell you exactly, but — uh — I mean, there's a lot of people hair [sic] that I cut. That's probably from a whole week's cuts, probably.
Q. Going back to this — uh — was the 20th, the 19th, whose hair did you cut?
A. Cut couple of bunches' hair. Some kids' hair.
Q
...

To continue reading

Request your trial
95 cases
  • Rogers v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • January 23, 2012
    ...a defendant's silence or nonverbal conduct during questioning subsequent to a valid waiver of rights.” People v. Hart, 214 Ill.2d 490, 293 Ill.Dec. 290, 828 N.E.2d 260, 273 (2005). See also Sanders v. State, 230 Ga.App. 176, 177(3), 495 S.E.2d 653 (1998). Thus, Appellant's reliance on Mallo......
  • People v. Woods
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • April 7, 2005
  • People v. Sanchez
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • June 21, 2013
    ...coincidence that the number Sanchez used belonged to a close friend of her mother. Infra ¶ 52 (quoting People v. Hart, 214 Ill.2d 490, 520, 293 Ill.Dec. 290, 828 N.E.2d 260 (2005)). However, such a coincidence is not so inherently improbable that it must be rejected as a matter of common se......
  • People v. Theis
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • December 20, 2011
    ...a defendant's silence or nonverbal conduct during questioning subsequent to a valid waiver of rights is admissible. See People v. Hart, 214 Ill.2d 490, 514–15, 293 Ill.Dec. 290, 828 N.E.2d 260 (2005). Accordingly, defendant cannot establish plain error regarding this issue. See Nicholas, 21......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • Table of Cases
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Illinois Objections
    • May 1, 2013
    ...904 NE2d 1077 (1st Dist 2009), §§8:10, 8:60, 8:110 People v. Harrison , 196 Ill App 3d 298, 553 NE2d 746 (1990), §18:10 People v. Hart , 214 Ill 2d 490 (2005), §21:60 People v. Hartness , 45 Ill App 3d 129, 358 NEd 954 (3rd Dist 1977), §9:30 People v. Harvey , 211 Ill 2d 368, 813 NE2d 181 (......
  • Closing Argument
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Illinois Objections
    • May 1, 2013
    ...breached that standard of care, and patient’s own expert testified that he had no criticism of orthopedist’s surgery. People v. Hart , 214 Ill 2d 490, 828 NE2d 260 (2005). Defendant’s question to detective following his arrest as to what kind of agreement he would get if he cooperated was n......

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