People v. Hudson, 104470.

Citation228 Ill.2d 181,886 N.E.2d 964
Decision Date20 March 2008
Docket NumberNo. 104470.,104470.
PartiesThe PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Appellee, v. William A. HUDSON, Appellant.
CourtSupreme Court of Illinois
886 N.E.2d 964
228 Ill.2d 181
The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Appellee,
William A. HUDSON, Appellant.
No. 104470.
Supreme Court of Illinois.
March 20, 2008.

[886 N.E.2d 965]

Charles M. Schiedel, Daniel D. Yuhas, Deputy Defenders, Lawrence Bapst, Ryan R. Wilson, Assistant Defenders, Office of the State Appellate Defender, Springfield, for appellant.

Lisa Madigan, Attorney General, Springfield, Jonathan Bernard, State's Attorney, Quincy (Michael A. Scodro, Solicitor

[886 N.E.2d 966]

General, Michael M. Glick, Erin M. O'Connell, Assistant Attorneys General, Chicago, of counsel), for the People.


Justice KARMEIER delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion:

The defendant, William Hudson, was charged in the circuit court of Adams County with home invasion (720 ILCS 5/12-11(a)(2) (West 2004)) (count I) and attempt (kidnapping) (720 ILCS 5/8-4(a), 10-1(a)(2) (West 2004)) (count II). A jury found defendant guilty of home invasion, but was unable to reach a verdict on attempt (kidnapping). Defendant was subsequently sentenced to 20 years in prison. He appealed, arguing that (1) psychological injury does not satisfy the "injury" element of the offense of home invasion; (2) the evidence was insufficient to show that he intended to harm the victim, Megan Walker; (3) the evidence was insufficient to prove that Walker suffered psychological harm; and (4) the circuit court denied him a fair hearing on his posttrial claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel. The appellate court rejected defendant's first three contentions, affirming the judgment of the circuit court in part. However, the appellate court vacated the circuit court's judgment insofar as it denied defendant's posttrial motions, and the appellate court ordered the cause remanded for further proceedings in that regard. No. 4-06-0181 (unpublished order under Supreme Court Rule 23). We granted defendant's petition for leave to appeal. 210 Ill.2d R. 315.

On appeal, defendant argues that (1) the trial court erred in allowing the prosecution to present evidence of psychological trauma and instructing the jury that evidence of psychological trauma could satisfy the injury element of the offense of home invasion, and (2) assuming, arguendo, proof of psychological trauma can be so used, the State's evidence was insufficient to prove psychological harm where no expert testimony was presented. We will set forth those facts relevant to our disposition.


An amended information was filed in this case on April 27, 2005, charging defendant with home invasion and attempt (kidnapping). Count I, charging home invasion, alleged that defendant, who was not a police officer acting in the line of duty, knowingly and without authority entered the dwelling place of Megan Walker, that he remained there until he knew or had reason to know that Walker was present, and he intentionally caused injury to her. Defendant was tried before a jury on August 10, 2005.

Sixteen-year-old Megan Walker testified that, in April of 2005, she lived at 913 Chestnut Street in Quincy, Illinois, with her mother, Theresa Clowers, and her stepfather. In the early morning hours of April 26, 2005, the family's pet bird started making a lot of noise and Megan went to the kitchen to investigate. When she turned on the light, she saw a man (later identified as defendant) standing in the kitchen, close to the back door. He was wearing a shirt, but was not wearing pants. Megan had never seen him before.

Megan asked him who he was and what he was doing there, but defendant did not respond. Instead, defendant advanced toward her, grabbed her wrists and her face, and pushed her against the basement door. He said, "Help me. I just got fucked." Megan testified she was scared and was yelling for her mother. Defendant then grabbed the back of her hair and, with her hair wrapped around his hand, he began to pull her toward the back door. As defendant

886 N.E.2d 967

pulled her toward the door, Megan continued to scream for her mother. When they reached the doorway, Megan held onto the doorknob in an attempt to keep defendant from dragging her outside. Defendant took off running when Megan's mother appeared in the kitchen.

Megan testified that she sustained various physical injuries in the course of the assault. She said defendant hurt her when he pulled her by the hair. Afterward, she had "really big bumps" on the back of her head, which "just kept * * * throbbing." Her shoulder was also injured in the course of the struggle. Megan described it as "really bruised." Her little finger was jammed and "felt like it was broken." In addition to her physical injuries, Megan testified that she does not sleep much since the incident and feels uneasy in her own home. She said she is afraid to go into the kitchen by herself when it is dark. She thinks about that night and is still bothered by it.

Megan identified the defendant at trial. She testified she did not give defendant permission to come into her home, and he did not leave when she encountered him. To the contrary, he assaulted her.

Megan's mother, Theresa Clowers, testified that she, her husband, and her 16-year-old daughter, Megan Walker, lived at 913 Chestnut Street in Quincy, Illinois, in April of 2005. In the early morning hours of April 26, 2005, Clowers heard a "rukus" in her kitchen followed by "a scream of terror" from Megan. Clowers ran to the kitchen and found the back door standing open and Megan holding her head and crying. Clowers called 911, reporting that someone had broken into her house and had assaulted her daughter.

After the police arrived, and she and Megan had spoken with responding officers, Clowers took Megan to the emergency room. Although she was eventually released to go home, Megan was very upset and wanted Clowers to hold her while they were at the hospital. Megan cried the rest of the morning. At the time of the assault, Clowers noticed that Megan's face and cheeks were "red like * * * fingers had been squeezing her." Megan's right shoulder was red and the little finger on her right hand was swollen.

Clowers testified that, at the time of trial, three months after the assault, Megan still was not sleeping much. According to Clowers, at times, for "three or four days she won't sleep at all." Clowers stated that Megan was not like that before the assault. After the assault, Megan was afraid to go into, or stay in, the kitchen by herself. She now tends to isolate herself in her bedroom. As of the time of trial, Megan was not eating well, she seemed sad, and was "teary-eyed a lot." Again, that was not indicative of her behavior before she was assaulted.

Clowers testified that she never gave permission to defendant to enter her home. She stated, at the time of the incident, she had a large doghouse outside her backdoor, a doghouse large enough that "two adult people can get in it."

Quincy police officers, who responded to Walker's residence, testified at trial, substantially corroborating the testimony of Megan and her mother. Officers found defendant behind the house next door to the Clowers residence. Defendant was wearing a blue shirt, but was not wearing pants.

One officer, who observed Megan immediately after the assault, testified that she was crying and "extremely upset" when he arrived on the scene. It was "several minutes" before she was able to carry on a conversation. He observed some redness on Megan's arm, and he noted that she complained of a finger injury. He accompanied

886 N.E.2d 968

Megan to the hospital, where he learned that she had a large abrasion on her shoulder.

Another officer searched the doghouse located in the backyard of the Clowers residence. In that doghouse, he found a pair of jeans, boots, and a hat. In the jeans, he found a wallet containing defendant's Arizona driver's license.

The arresting officer interviewed defendant around 2 a.m. on April 26, 2005. The officer smelled the odor of alcohol emanating from defendant; however, he noted that defendant was cooperative and responsive, and he did not appear to be confused. Because defendant appeared to be intoxicated, officers administered a portable breath test, the result of which was a reading of 0.19.

In the course of the interview, defendant told the officer he was a truck driver from Arizona. While traveling from Ohio to Arizona, defendant said he "got dumped off in St. Louis." He said he hitched a ride to Quincy and had been drinking at a Quincy tavern on the night of the incident. He left the tavern with a man who was supposed to give him a ride to a hotel and "hook him up with a female [who] would eventually perform oral sex on him." According to defendant, he later got out of the man's car and into another car occupied by a woman. He said she helped him take his pants and boots off; however, he could not remember exactly what happened after that.

Defendant said he did recall walking into the residence at 913 Chestnut and being startled when a young female turned on the light. He conceded that he did not have permission to enter the residence; however, he said he thought he was entering his apartment in Arizona. Defendant admitted that the young girl asked him several times what he was doing there and told him to get out of the house. He acknowledged that he responded by walking toward her, grabbing her by the shoulder and/or the hair, and attempting to drag her out of the residence as she was screaming. Defendant offered no explanation for his actions. He did not tell the girl that he had been robbed, nor did he ask her to call the police.

Yet another officer testified to a subsequent statement defendant gave to police. In that version of events, defendant said he left a local bar with a man who was supposed to find him a place to stay. They ended up at a house near the Clowers residence. Defendant said he purchased crack cocaine while at that location, and the individuals with whom he was...

To continue reading

Request your trial
135 cases
  • The People Of The State Of Ill. v. Gutman, 1-08-1379.
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • March 31, 2010
    ...or (2) the error is so fundamental, and of such magnitude, that the accused is denied the right to a fair trial. People v. Hudson, 228 Ill.2d 181, 191, 319 Ill.Dec. 840, 886 N.E.2d 964 (2008), citing People v. Johnson, 208 Ill.2d 53, 64, 281 Ill.Dec. 1, 803 N.E.2d 405 (2003). Finally, befor......
  • People v. White, 109689.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • September 26, 2011
    ...whether error occurred at all”); People v. Walker, 232 Ill.2d 113, 124, 327 Ill.Dec. 570, 902 N.E.2d 691 (2009); People v. Hudson, 228 Ill.2d 181, 191, 319 Ill.Dec. 840, 886 N.E.2d 964 (2008); People v. Urdiales, 225 Ill.2d 354, 415, 312 Ill.Dec. 876, 871 N.E.2d 669 (2007); People v. Durr, ......
  • People v. Romero, 1–14–3132
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • May 24, 2018
    ...error argument is determining whether an error occurred, which requires a " ‘ "substantive look" ’ " at the issue. People v. Hudson , 228 Ill. 2d 181, 191, 319 Ill.Dec. 840, 886 N.E.2d 964 (2008).¶ 116 2. Admission of Hearsay Evidence ¶ 117 "Hearsay evidence is an out-of-court statement off......
  • People v. Harris, 103796.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • March 20, 2008
    ...been riding is about to be arrested, would feel free to decline to provide his driver's license or other identification. Being involved 886 N.E.2d 964 in a traffic stop is not quite as stressful or upsetting for the passenger as it is for the driver. As this court has noted, in a portion of......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • Procedures for Objections & Motions
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Illinois Objections
    • May 1, 2013
    ...appellate review, a party must make the appropriate objections in the trial court or the issue will be deemed waived. People v. Hudson , 228 Ill 2d 181, 886 NE2d 964 (2008); Johnson v. Johnson, 386 Ill App 3d 522, 898 NE2d 145 (1st Dist 2008); Jones v. Rallos , 384 Ill App 3d 73, 890 NE2d 1......
  • Table of Cases
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Illinois Objections
    • May 1, 2013
    ...v. Hudson , 157 Ill 2d 401, 626 NE2d 161 (1993), §2:250 People v. Hudson , 195 Ill 2d 117, 745 NE2d 1246 (2001), §1:90 People v. Hudson, 228 Ill 2d 181, 886 NE2d 964 (2008), §1:210 People v. Hudson , 228 Ill 2d 181, 886 NE2d 964 (2008), §1:30 People v. Human , 331 Ill App 3d 809, 773 NE2d 4......

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