People v. Haynes, 77569

CourtSupreme Court of Illinois
Writing for the CourtBILANDIC
Citation174 Ill.2d 204,220 Ill.Dec. 406,673 N.E.2d 318
Parties, 220 Ill.Dec. 406 The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Appellee, v. Jonathan HAYNES, Appellant.
Docket NumberNo. 77569,77569
Decision Date24 October 1996

Page 318

673 N.E.2d 318
174 Ill.2d 204, 220 Ill.Dec. 406
The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Appellee,
Jonathan HAYNES, Appellant.
No. 77569.
Supreme Court of Illinois.
Oct. 24, 1996.
Rehearing Denied Dec. 2, 1996.

Page 322

[220 Ill.Dec. 410] [174 Ill.2d 211] Rita A. Fry, Public Defender, Chicago (Richard E. Gade, Assistant Public Defender, of counsel), for appellant.

James E. Ryan, Attorney General, Springfield, and Jack O'Malley, State's Attorney, Chicago (Arleen C. Anderson, Assistant Attorney General, Chicago, and Renee Goldfarb and Peter D. Fischer, Assistant State's Attorneys, of counsel), for the People.

Chief Justice BILANDIC delivered the opinion of the court:

The defendant, Jonathan Haynes, was indicted on three counts of murder (720 ILCS 5/9-1(a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(3) (West 1992)) and one count of burglary (720 ILCS 5/19-1 (West 1992)) arising out of the August 6, 1993, shooting death of Dr. Martin Sullivan in Wilmette, Illinois. Following a bench trial in the circuit court of Cook County, the defendant was found guilty on all counts. The defendant waived a jury for death sentencing. The trial court found that the defendant was eligible for the death penalty. 720 ILCS 5/9-1(b)(6), (b)(11) (West 1992). The trial court further found that there were no mitigating factors precluding imposition of the death penalty and, accordingly, sentenced the defendant to death. The defendant's death sentence has been stayed pending his direct appeal to this court. 134 Ill.2d Rs. 603, 609(a). We now affirm the defendant's convictions for intentional murder and burglary and sentence.

[174 Ill.2d 212] FACTS

Prior to the defendant's trial, a hearing was held to determine the defendant's fitness to stand trial. The defendant waived a jury for this hearing, and the hearing proceeded before the trial judge. Expert witnesses testified on behalf of both the State and the defendant. The testimony given by these witnesses is discussed in detail later in this opinion. After hearing the evidence, the trial court ruled that the defendant was fit to stand trial.

Immediately after the trial court ruled on the defendant's fitness, the defendant informed the court that he wished to proceed without counsel. The trial court accepted the defendant's waiver of counsel and appointed two assistant public defenders to act as standby counsel. The defendant proceeded to represent himself at his trial and death sentencing hearing. The defendant waived a jury for trial.

At trial, the defendant admitted murdering Dr. Martin Sullivan. The defendant delivered an opening statement in which he condemned "fake Aryan cosmetics," in particular, bleached blond hair, blue tinted contact lenses and plastic surgery. The defendant further stated that, in committing his "murders," he had issued a challenge to society to act "in accordance with your stated ideals of human equality."

The State's evidence established that, at approximately 2:15 p.m. on August 6, 1993, a man who identified himself as "John Rothmann" entered the office of plastic surgeon Dr. Martin Sullivan in Wilmette, Illinois. This "John Rothmann" had earlier contacted the office and scheduled an appointment for this time with Dr. Sullivan to discuss undergoing a rhinoplasty. Witnesses in the office later identified the defendant as the man who had identified himself as "John Rothmann." After sitting in the waiting area, the defendant was shown into examination room 1, a room with only one door. Dr. Sullivan entered examination room 1 shortly [174 Ill.2d 213] after the defendant. Several minutes later, office employees heard loud noises, including "popping" noises and glass shattering coming from examination room 1. The door to examination room 1 opened and the defendant ran out of the room and out of the office suite. Dr. Sullivan stumbled bleeding out of examination room 1 and asked someone to call an ambulance because he had been shot. An ambulance arrived at the scene a few minutes later and transported Dr. Sullivan to the hospital. Dr. Sullivan died as a result of his injuries. An autopsy revealed that Dr. Sullivan had sustained three gunshot wounds to the chest and a graze wound to the head. The shots had been fired at close range, from 18 to 24 inches away.

On the evening of August 6, 1993, Mitchell Lifson, an administrative aide for State Representative Jeff Schoenberg, saw a television news report of the Sullivan murder. The

Page 323

[220 Ill.Dec. 411] report identified the perpetrator as "John Rothmann" and included a description of the man. Lifson recalled that, at approximately 10:45 a.m. that day, the defendant, using the name "John Rothmann," had come into Representative Schoenberg's office and spoken to Lifson. The Representative's office is located about three or four blocks from Dr. Sullivan's office. Lifson told the defendant that the Representative was not available and asked for the defendant's name. The defendant was hesitant to divulge his name, though he eventually did identify himself as "John Rothmann," and refused to leave his telephone number. When Lifson spoke to Representative Schoenberg about the defendant a short time later, the Representative told Lifson to obtain the defendant's license plate number if possible.

Lifson left the office at about 12:15 p.m. As he was leaving, he noticed the defendant standing next to a light-blue Volkswagen Beetle with Maryland license [174 Ill.2d 214] plates. Lifson wrote down the license plate number. Thereafter, when Lifson heard on the news that police were looking for a "John Rothmann," he contacted Wilmette police and gave them his information. Lifson identified the defendant as the man who had come to the Representative's office on August 6, 1993.

The name "John Rothmann," a description of his vehicle with the license plate number and a police sketch were distributed to local police agencies. In the early morning hours of August 8, 1993, a Skokie police officer observed a vehicle that matched the distributed description and license plate number driven by a white male. The officer stopped the vehicle and the driver identified himself as Jonathan Haynes. The officer identified the defendant as the man driving the car.

The defendant was taken into custody by Wilmette police. After being read Miranda warnings, the defendant requested a pen and some paper so that he could write a statement. The defendant also gave an oral statement to Wilmette police detectives. In that statement, the defendant stated that he telephoned Dr. Sullivan's office on August 3 or 4, 1993, and made an appointment for August 6, 1993, at 2:15 p.m. under the name "John Rothmann." The defendant described that he arrived in Wilmette at around noon on August 6 and first went to Representative Schoenberg's office. The defendant wanted to ask the Representative some questions about problems he perceived in society. After leaving the Representative's office, the defendant drove to a gas station located next to Dr. Sullivan's office and parked his car in that lot. At almost exactly 2:15 p.m., the defendant left his car and walked to Dr. Sullivan's office. The defendant related that, upon entering the office, he identified himself as John Rothmann and filled out patient identification forms using that name. He was shown into an examination room at about 2:50 p.m., [174 Ill.2d 215] where he waited for Dr. Sullivan for approximately 10 minutes. After Dr. Sullivan walked into the room and introduced himself, the defendant pulled out a gun and started shooting at him. The defendant stated that the gun was a blue steel Colt .38 Special revolver. After the first shot, Dr. Sullivan reached for the gun and the two men grappled for it. The defendant stated that he pulled the trigger seven times, firing six rounds. After the last shot, the defendant ran out of the examination room and out of the office. The defendant ran back to his car and drove away. The defendant described in his statement that he had planned an escape route and he sketched the detectives a diagram of that route. The defendant also stated that he had deliberately chosen a parking spot which allowed him a quick escape.

The defendant further related, in this statement, his reason for choosing Dr. Sullivan. The defendant said that he had decided to kill a plastic surgeon and Dr. Sullivan had the largest advertisement in the Yellow Pages. The defendant relayed that he had waited to shoot Dr. Sullivan in his office so that he could be sure that he killed the right person. The defendant also told police that he had arrived in the Chicago area about a month earlier for the express purpose of killing Charles Stroupe, who lived in Lake Forest, Illinois. The defendant desired to kill Stroupe because he was the president of Wesley Jensen Corporation, which, according to the defendant, was the original and largest manufacturer of blue tinted contact lenses.

Page 324

[220 Ill.Dec. 412] The defendant told police that he had conducted surveillance of Stroupe's home, and had attempted to kill Stroupe on August 2, 1993, but had been unable to perpetrate the killing. As a result, the defendant decided to target a plastic surgeon instead. The defendant stated that he remained in the Chicago area after killing Dr. Sullivan so that he could again attempt the murder of Stroupe. Finally, the [174 Ill.2d 216] defendant relayed that his purpose in killing Dr. Sullivan and in trying to kill Stroupe was to strike out against those who promoted "fake Aryan beauty."

The defendant's written statement was also read into evidence. In addition to confessing to the murder of Dr. Sullivan and the attempted murder of Charles Stroupe, the written statement included the defendant's confession to the 1987 murder of Frank Ringi in San Francisco, California. Ringi, the defendant described, was a hair colorist. In that statement, the defendant again described his motivation for the murders as the condemnation of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
196 practice notes
  • People v. Smith, Appeal No. 3-16-0454
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • 11 Febrero 2020
    ...received did not prejudice his rights.’ " Wright , 2017 IL 119561, ¶ 41, 418 Ill.Dec. 866, 91 N.E.3d 826 (quoting People v. Haynes , 174 Ill. 2d 204, 236, 220 Ill.Dec. 406, 673 N.E.2d 318 (1996) ). ¶ 54 Defendant was admonished during his first court appearance that he faced extended-term s......
  • People v. Khan, 1-19-0679
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • 30 Junio 2021
    ...must be voluntary, knowing, and intelligent. Jiles , 364 Ill. App. 3d at 328, 301 Ill.Dec. 79, 845 N.E.2d 944 (citing People v. Haynes , 174 Ill. 2d 204, 235, 220 Ill.Dec. 406, 673 N.E.2d 318 (1996) ). A defendant's waiver of the right to counsel must be clear and unequivocal. People v. May......
  • People v. Cortes, 80149
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • 23 Enero 1998 will not be disturbed on review unless it is against the [181 Ill.2d 277] manifest weight of the evidence. People v. Haynes, 174 Ill.2d 204, 226, 220 Ill.Dec. 406, 673 N.E.2d 318 (1996). In the instant case, the trial court's finding was amply supported by the record and, in accorda......
  • People v. Burton, 80726
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • 1 Octubre 1998
    ...the nature and purpose of the proceedings against him or to assist in his defense. 725 ILCS 5/104-10 (West 1994); People v. Haynes, 174 Ill.2d 204, 226, 220 Ill.Dec. 406, 673 N.E.2d 318 (1996). Defendant's fitness is presumed by statute. 725 ILCS 5/104-10 (West 1994). If a bona fide doubt o......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
189 cases
  • People v. Reese, Docket No. 120011
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • 19 Octubre 2017
    ...¶ 61 Illinois Supreme Court Rule 401(a) governs the trial court's acceptance of a defendant's waiver of counsel. People v. Haynes , 174 Ill. 2d 204, 235, 220 Ill.Dec. 406, 673 N.E.2d 318 (1996). Rule 401(a) provides:"(a) Waiver of Counsel. Any waiver of counsel shall be in open court. The c......
  • People v. Moore, No. 85359.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • 17 Febrero 2000
    ...he is unable to understand the nature and purpose of the proceedings against him or to assist in his defense. People v. Haynes, 174 Ill.2d 204, 226, 220 Ill.Dec. 406, 673 N.E.2d 318 (1996); 725 ILCS 5/104-10 (West 1992). The records and affidavits that defendant attached to his amended post......
  • People v. Haynes, No. 85180
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • 6 Julio 2000
    ...and vacated defendant's convictions for knowing and felony murder. This court also affirmed defendant's death sentence. People v. Haynes, 174 Ill.2d 204, 220 Ill.Dec. 406, 673 N.E.2d 318 During the pendency of defendant's direct appeal, defendant filed a pro se petition pursuant to the Post......
  • People v. Pike, No. 1–12–2626.
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • 27 Enero 2016
    ...(2011). When a defendant is admonished in substantial compliance with Rule 401(a), there is a valid waiver of counsel. People v. Haynes, 174 Ill.2d 204, 236, 220 Ill.Dec. 406, 673 N.E.2d 318 (1996). ¶ 113 An otherwise inadequate admonition may be constitutionally sufficient, and therefore d......
  • 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