People v. Kelley
| Citation | 133 N.E.3d 641,2019 IL App (4th) 160598,433 Ill.Dec. 788 |
| Decision Date | 22 January 2019 |
| Docket Number | NO. 4-16-0598,4-16-0598 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kevin KELLEY, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
¶ 1 In April and May 2016, defendant, Kevin Kelley, was tried for the first degree murder ( 720 ILCS 5/9-1(a)(1) (West 2012) ) of Kelsie R. Blackford, and the jury found him guilty. In July 2016, the trial court sentenced him to imprisonment for 60 years.
¶ 2 Defendant appeals on five grounds.
¶ 3 First, defendant argues that the trial court abused its discretion by admitting Adreian White's testimony as propensity evidence pursuant to section 115-7.4 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) ( 725 ILCS 5/115-7.4 (West 2014) ) because (1) the events to which White testified bore little "factual similarity to the charged * * * offense" (id. § 115-7.4(b)(2) ) and (2) there was no evidence that defendant committed an "offense * * * of domestic violence" against White (id. § 115-7.4(a) ). Given the evidence, we cannot say that the court's finding of a factual similarity is unreasonable or arbitrary. As for whether defendant's violence against White, as recounted in her testimony, met the description of domestic violence, he has procedurally forfeited that issue, and the doctrine of plain error, which he invokes, does not avert the forfeiture.
¶ 4 Second, defendant claims that the trial court abused its discretion by admitting Theresa Kane's testimony as further evidence of his propensity to commit domestic violence. See id. He likewise argues a lack of factual similarity between her testimony and the charged offense. See id. § 115-7.4(b)(2). We disagree that it was unreasonable or arbitrary of the court to find that defendant's violent treatment of one girlfriend, Kane, was comparable to his violent treatment of another girlfriend, Blackford. So, again, we find no abuse of discretion.
¶ 5 Third, defendant complains that the State presented so much propensity evidence as to cause his trial to become a mini-trial on the propensity evidence. We find no abuse of discretion in the quantity of propensity evidence that the trial court allowed. We are unconvinced that the propensity evidence was so extensive as to distract the jury from the issues in the case or to unduly prolong the trial.
¶ 6 Fourth, defendant argues that the trial court abused its discretion by sustaining the prosecutor's relevancy objection when defense counsel tried to elicit testimony from Scott Matthews that a man, street-named Chico, with whom Matthews saw Blackford walking three months before her disappearance was a known drug dealer. The purpose of the testimony would have been to suggest that Chico, instead of defendant, possibly murdered Blackford. We uphold the court's ruling because such testimony would have invited speculation. No evidence connected Chico to Blackford's death.
¶ 7 Fifth, defendant complains that, in the sentencing hearing, the trial court violated the rule against double enhancement by considering, as an aggravating factor, something that already was implicit in the offense of murder, namely, the grief of the victim's family members. Actually, the grief of the victim's family members is not implicit in murder itself but, instead, is a frequent consequence of murder. So, there was no violation of the rule against double enhancement.
¶ 8 Therefore, we affirm the judgment.
¶ 11 On August 29, 2013, Steven Bebout was fishing on the Sangamon River, in a remote rural area, 397 County Road 2650 North in Newcomb Township, Illinois, when he came upon some human bones near the conjunction of a dried-up tributary and the river. He used his cell phone to call the Champaign County Sheriff's Office.
¶ 12 An investigator with the sheriff's office, Nicki Bolt, found an Illinois identification card among the remnants of a blue sweatshirt, which was beneath the skull. It was Blackford's identification card.
¶ 13 Dental records confirmed that the skeletal remains were those of Blackford.
¶ 15 Cris E. Hughes, a clinical assistant professor of anthropology at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, testified that she found 29 straight-line incisions on Blackford's bones, as if someone had attempted to dismember her with a knife. Although the cuts were inflicted around the time of death, Hughes was unable to determine how Blackford died. Nor could Hughes determine exactly when Blackford died; the best she could do was estimate that the date of death was sometime between September 2008 and June 2013.
¶ 17 Defendant testified that he became acquainted with Blackford in late October 2012, while she was working as a prostitute. She stayed with him a few nights. He denied that they were in an exclusive relationship. He saw her occasionally and helped her out, such as by giving her rides to drug rehabilitation meetings, but he did not see her as often as every week.
¶ 18 Initially, defendant told investigators that he last saw Blackford on November 22, 2012. Later, after having time to think it over, he revised his account, telling them that he last saw her on December 19, 2012. She was with him from December 17 to 19, 2012, and accompanied him to Kenneth Roessler's house, where defendant was putting up Christmas lights.
¶ 19 Erick Dawson testified that on December 18, 2012, he saw Blackford walking outside at night in Urbana, Illinois, in nothing but shorts and a tank top and that he gave her a ride and let her use his cell phone. Blackford texted defendant to meet her at Circle K, a gas station on Cunningham Avenue, because (as she told defendant in the text message) she had been kicked out of the place where she had been staying.
¶ 20 Defendant testified that he picked Blackford up and took her to Cindy Roseman's house, where Roseman gave her three sets of jeans and a pair of socks. After dropping Blackford off at Roseman's house, defendant returned to Roessler's house and resumed hanging Christmas lights. He then picked up Blackford from Roseman's house (according to his testimony), and he could not be sure, but he believed that he and Blackford spent the night of December 18, 2012, together in a hotel.
¶ 21 On December 19, 2012, defendant moved into a rented trailer at 425 East County Road 2725 North, Newcomb Township. In the evening of December 19, he and Blackford bought pseudoephedrine pills from some pharmacies, and afterward, she spent the rest of the evening with him in his trailer.
¶ 22 The trailer was near the Sangamon River. If the ground was dry, it was possible to drive from the trailer, across a pasture, to the river.
¶ 24 Defendant testified that the night of December 19, 2012, was the first and only night he and Blackford spent together in his trailer. He told investigators it was very cold outside that night and that he fell asleep as Blackford was washing dishes and cleaning up the kitchen. When he awoke the next morning, his wallet (which contained $185 in cash), his switchblade, and Blackford were gone.
¶ 25 Because the trailer was "in the middle of nowhere," defendant maintained that there was "no way [Blackford] could have walked anywhere from this trailer." It was his belief (he testified) that she must have used his cell phone to call someone to come and pick her up. The prosecutor asked defendant on cross-examination:
¶ 26 After the disappearance of Blackford and his wallet, defendant went to a Verizon store to obtain his phone records and see whether Blackford had called someone from his cell phone and then deleted the call. In the Verizon store, he programmed a newly purchased phone in Blackford's name, and, posing as her, texted various people whom he knew to be her acquaintances. He explained at trial that he did so in an attempt to find Blackford—and his wallet.
¶ 27 After checking his phone records, defendant telephoned several people, including Dawson, to find out if Blackford was with them. Dawson confirmed that he received numerous calls in which a man kept accusing him of being with Blackford. Defense counsel asked Dawson:
Annoyed by the calls, Dawson texted back: " "
¶ 28 Defendant testified that he also telephoned Lance Leonard, with whom Blackford used to stay. Defendant claimed at trial that he had seen Blackford's footprints in the snow at Leonard's house after she disappeared. He also claimed to have seen a tire track at Leonard's house that matched one he saw by his trailer.
¶ 29 According to defendant's testimony, he stopped looking for Blackford a couple of days before Christmas 2012 when he found his wallet tucked inside his house slippers, in his trailer. (He explained that he did not always lock the door of his trailer before leaving.) Defense counsel asked him:
His switchblade, however, never was returned to him.
¶ 30 Defendant testified that sometime after the return of his...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Houser
...with the commission of the crime, then the trial court should exclude the evidence." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) People v. Kelley, 2019 IL App (4th) 160598, ¶ 113,133 N.E.3d 641.¶ 58 In this case, defendant sought to present evidence suggesting a man who had attacked and sexually as......