People v. Heard

Decision Date17 June 1999
Docket NumberNo. 81443.,81443.
Citation718 N.E.2d 58,240 Ill.Dec. 577,187 Ill.2d 36
PartiesThe PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Appellee, v. Delbert HEARD, Appellant.
CourtIllinois Supreme Court

Frederick F. Cohn, Chicago, for Delbert Heard.

James E. Ryan, Attorney General, Springfield, Richard A. Devine, State's Attorney, Chicago (William L. Browers, Assistant Attorney General, Chicago, Renee Goldfarb, Barbara Jones and Nancy Faulls, Assistant State's Attorneys, of counsel), for the People.

Justice BILANDIC delivered the opinion of the court:

Defendant, Delbert Heard, was charged in the circuit court of Cook County with 12 counts of first degree murder, 6 counts of home invasion, one count of residential burglary, and one count of burglary. These charges related to the November 11, 1992, murders of Natalie Wilson, Kenneth Seals, and Zita Jones. Prior to defendant's trial, the State nol-prossed three counts of murder, three counts of home invasion, the residential burglary count, and the burglary count. The jury returned a verdict of guilty against defendant on three counts of first degree murder, and the trial court entered judgment on these counts. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty on the home invasion counts. Defendant filed a post-trial motion for judgment of acquittal or a new trial. The trial court denied defendant's motion.

Defendant waived a jury for the death sentencing hearing. The trial court found defendant eligible for the death penalty based upon the statutory aggravating factor that the defendant murdered two or more individuals. 720 ILCS 5/9-1(b)(3) (West 1992). After considering evidence in aggravation and mitigation, the trial court found no mitigating factors sufficient to preclude imposition of the death penalty and sentenced defendant to death.

Defendant's death sentence has been stayed pending direct review by this court. See Ill. Const.1970, art. VI, § 4(b); 134 Ill.2d Rs. 603, 609(a). For the reasons that follow, we affirm defendant's convictions and death sentence.

FACTS

The evidence adduced at trial showed that on November 11, 1992, Natalie Wilson, Natalie's 10-year-old daughter, Tanquinka (nicknamed TQ), and Natalie's cousin, Zita Jones, lived in a first-floor apartment behind a storefront at 136 East 118th Street in Chicago. At the time of the murders, Kenneth Seals was Natalie's boyfriend, and Natalie was pregnant with Kenneth's child. Natalie and Kenneth began their relationship in April of 1992. Previously, defendant (nicknamed Heavy) had been Natalie's boyfriend for approximately five years. Sometime in 1992, Natalie and defendant ended their relationship.

TQ testified that, on November 10, 1992, at approximately 8 p.m., defendant knocked on the front door of Natalie's apartment and asked if he could enter. Natalie, Kenneth, and TQ were all in the apartment. When Natalie told defendant that he could not come into the apartment, defendant replied, "I'm not going to hurt you." Defendant asked where TQ was, stating that he wanted to buy some of the candy that TQ was selling for a school fundraiser. Natalie told defendant that TQ was not home. Kenneth did not say anything to defendant. Defendant kicked the door and left.

TQ then bathed and went to bed. TQ's bedroom was next to Natalie's bedroom. There was no heat in TQ's room because the radiator was in Natalie's room. The door that led from TQ's room to Natalie's room was therefore kept open. Later that evening, TQ heard the side door unlock, and heard Zita and her boyfriend talking and laughing. Zita and her boyfriend went into Zita's bedroom. TQ later heard Zita and her boyfriend walk back to the side door and unlock it. TQ heard the door lock again and then heard Zita walk back to her bedroom.

As TQ was going back to sleep, she heard the door unlock again, slower this time, and she heard the floor squeak. After hearing these noises, TQ saw defendant standing at the foot of Natalie's bed. TQ heard defendant exchange words with Natalie and Kenneth, and heard defendant say, "Don't try it." TQ heard gunshots and saw defendant lean over Natalie and Kenneth. According to TQ, defendant had a long black gun, and sparks were coming from it. TQ heard about 25 or 30 shots coming from her mother's room. TQ then heard Zita screaming and the floor squeaking again. Defendant went to Zita's room, and TQ heard more gunshots. TQ then heard the floor squeaking very fast and the outside gate rattle.

At this point, TQ arose from her bed and went into her mother's bedroom. TQ asked Natalie if she was okay. Natalie tried to lift her head but did not respond. Kenneth had been moaning, but the moaning stopped. TQ went to Zita's room. Zita was lying down with "a hole in her head" and "stuff" coming out of her neck.

TQ called the police and ran upstairs to get help from the landlords, Monique and Melvin DeYoung. Mrs. DeYoung testified regarding the events of the evening. On November 10, 1992, the DeYoungs went to sleep at approximately 10 p.m. They were later awakened by gunfire. Mrs. DeYoung heard heavy footsteps and then heard the kitchen door to Natalie's apartment slam. Mrs. DeYoung heard moaning from the first floor.

Mrs. DeYoung testified that TQ came into Mrs. DeYoung's bedroom. TQ's eyes were "bugged," and she was shaking. TQ told Mrs. DeYoung that "somebody shot my mama" and "something" was coming out of Natalie's eye. TQ stated that she tried to wake Natalie and Kenneth, but that Natalie would not wake up, and Kenneth said "huh" and then died. TQ told Mrs. DeYoung that she next went to Zita's room, but Zita had "something" coming out of her eye and was dead.

TQ and Mrs. DeYoung went to Natalie's apartment. Paramedics and police officers were in the apartment. TQ tried to get back to Natalie. When the police officers would not let TQ into the area, TQ became very upset and began mumbling to herself. Mrs. DeYoung heard TQ say, "Man, why did Heavy shoot my mama?" When Mrs. DeYoung asked TQ if she saw defendant, TQ said, "Man, why did he shoot my mama? I didn't see nothing. I didn't see nothing Mrs. DeYoung." Mrs. DeYoung described TQ as "very shaken," "concerned," "frightened," and "in shock."

Mary Pearson, the common law wife of defendant's second cousin as well as the sister-in-law of Natalie, also testified regarding her arrival at the crime scene. When Mary entered the apartment, TQ ran to her and said, "Auntie Net, he gon killed my mother." When Mary asked TQ who killed Natalie, TQ hugged Mary but did not answer Mary's question. Mary and TQ then went with detectives in an attempt to find defendant. The group went to defendant's house, defendant's parent's house, defendant's sister's house, and the garage where defendant parked his tow truck. At each location, TQ laid down in the backseat of the car as if she did not want to be seen. When the detectives pulled up in front of defendant's parent's home, TQ told Mary, "He gon see us" and TQ began to cry. The day after the crimes occurred, defendant learned that the police were looking for him, and he then went to the police station.

Chicago Police Officer John Butler, a forensic investigator, testified regarding his processing of the crime scene. In one bedroom, Natalie and Kenneth's bodies were on the bed. In a second bedroom, Zita's body was on the bed. The victims had been shot numerous times. The police recovered a total of 32 cartridge cases from Natalie's apartment. All of the cartridge cases were 9-millimeter Luger FC. The police found a set of keys in the outside kitchen door. No fingerprints suitable for comparison were recovered from the keys. The police also found a Taurus .380 semiautomatic pistol on the window sill closest to Kenneth's body.

Assistant Chief Medical Examiner Dr. Mitra Kalelkar testified regarding her performance of the autopsies on the victims' bodies. The victims died from multiple gunshot wounds. Natalie and Zita were shot 5 times, and Kenneth was shot 17 times. Natalie was six to eight weeks pregnant.

After the prosecution rested, defendant presented the testimony of Alonzo Williams, Tina Coleman, and Kimberly Nelson. Alonzo Williams, defendant's friend, and Tina Coleman, defendant's fiancee, testified that they were with defendant on the night of the murders. Alonzo stated that on November 10, 1992, he met defendant and Tina at approximately 10 p.m. at a bowling alley. According to Alonzo, the group stayed at the bowling alley until 1:30 a.m. and then went to a restaurant until 2:30 a.m.

Tina testified that she was engaged to defendant, and that he is the father of her son. According to Tina, at 9:30 p.m. on November 10, 1992, defendant picked her up, and they met some of defendant's friends at a bowling alley. Tina stated that her sister paged her at about 1:30 a.m., and that she called her sister back from the bowling alley. Tina, defendant, and defendant's friends left the bowling alley at about 1:30 a.m. and went to a restaurant, where the group stayed until 2:30 a.m. Tina stated that she and defendant went to a hotel because defendant had overnight company at his apartment. They stayed at the hotel until 7 a.m.

Kimberly Nelson, Tina's sister, testified that, on November 11, 1992, at about 1:30 a.m., she talked to Tina on the phone. Tina called Kimberly after Kimberly paged her. Kimberly stated that she could hear that Tina was at a bowling alley because she heard pins in the background. Kimberly also stated that she heard defendant talking in the background.

The jury returned a verdict of guilty against defendant on three counts of first degree murder. At this stage in the proceedings, defendant obtained a new attorney. Defendant's new attorney filed a post-trial motion for judgment of acquittal or a new trial. The trial court denied defendant's motion. Defendant waived a jury for the death sentencing hearing. The trial court found defendant eligible for the death penalty based upon the statutory aggravating...

To continue reading

Request your trial
216 cases
  • Commonwealth of Pa. v. Spotz
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Supreme Court
    • April 29, 2011
  • People v. Bustos
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • October 29, 2020
  • People v. Smith
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • July 24, 2019
  • People v. Primm
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • December 29, 2000
    ... ... He and Humphries began running and turned into an alley ...         After turning into the alley, Jones testified that he hid behind a van parked in the middle of the alley and remained there until he heard one of his friends yelling that someone had been shot. At this point, he saw Humphries lying on the ground in the alley ...         Boler testified that, as soon as he saw the gun, he ran out ahead of his friends down 70 Street towards Eggleston Way. After the first three shots were ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results
4 books & journal articles
  • Procedures for Objections & Motions
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Illinois Objections
    • May 1, 2013
    ...People v. Chapman , 2012 Ill 111896, 965 NE2d 1119 (2012); People v. Donoho , 204 Ill 2d 159, 788 NE2d 707 (2003); People v. Heard , 187 Ill 2d 36, 718 NE2d 58 (1999); People v. Dabbs , 396 Ill App 3d 622, 919 NE2d 501 (3d Dist 2009), affirmed, 239 Ill 2d 277, 940 NE2d 1088 (2010), supersed......
  • Table of Cases
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Illinois Objections
    • May 1, 2013
    ..., 319 Ill App 3d 810, 745 NE2d 31 (2001), §21:40 People v. Hayes , 409 Ill App 3d 612, 949 NE2d 182 (2011), §21:110 People v. Heard , 187 Ill 2d 36, 718 NE2d 58 (1999), §§1:270, 1:370, 4:40, 13:10 People v. Hendricks , 145 Ill App 3d 71, 495 NE2d 85 (1986), rev’d on other grounds , 137 Ill ......
  • Photographs, Recordings & X-Rays
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Illinois Objections
    • May 1, 2013
    ...understanding the testimony of a pathologist or other witness. People v. Chapman , 194 Ill 2d 186, 743 NE2d 48 (2000); People v. Heard , 187 Ill 2d 36, 718 NE2d 58 (1999); People v. Richardson , 401 Ill App 3d 45, 929 NE2d 44 (1st Dist 2010); §13:10 Illinois Objections 13-328 People v. Bobo......
  • Relevance & Materiality
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Illinois Objections
    • May 1, 2013
    ...however, when it is relevant for any purpose other than to show the defendant’s propensity to commit a crime. People v. Heard , 187 Ill 2d 36, 718 NE2d 58 (1999); People v. Nelson , 2013 Ill App (1st) 102619, ___ NE2d ___ (2013); People v. Wilson, 214 Ill 2d 127, 824 NE2d 191 (2005); People......

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