People v. King

• Decision Date: 24 January 2020
• Docket Number: Docket No. 123926
• Citation: 2020 IL 123926,443 Ill.Dec. 19,161 N.E.3d 143
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Appellant, v. Shadwick R. KING, Appellee.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

2020 IL 123926

161 N.E.3d 143

443 Ill.Dec. 19

The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Appellant,

v.Shadwick R. KING, Appellee.

Docket No. 123926

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Opinion filed January 24, 2020

Kwame Raoul, Attorney General, of Springfield (Jane Elinor Notz, Solicitor General, and Michael M. Glick and Katherine M. Doersch, Assistant Attorneys General, of Chicago, of counsel), for the People.

Matthew R. Carter, Elizabeth S. Deshaies, and Kate DeBoer, of Winston & Strawn LLP, and Adam R. Vaught, of Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP, both of Chicago, for appellee.

Karl Leonard and Lindsay Hagy, of University of Chicago Law School, of Chicago, for amici curiae the Exoneration Project et al.

JUSTICE THOMAS delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion.

¶ 1 Defendant, Shadwick R. King, was charged with the first degree murder ( 720 ILCS 5/9-1(a)(1) (West 2014)) of his wife, Kathleen King. Following a jury trial in the circuit court of Kane County, defendant was convicted and sentenced to 30 years in prison. Defendant appealed, and the appellate court reversed defendant's conviction and remanded for a new trial. 2018 IL App (2d) 151112, 430 Ill.Dec. 876, 127 N.E.3d 112. We allowed the State's petition for leave to appeal ( Ill. S. Ct. R. 315 (eff. July 1, 2018)) and now affirm the appellate court's judgment in part and reverse it in part.

¶ 2 BACKGROUND

¶ 3 The appellate court's opinion below sets forth a thorough and comprehensive account of the factual history of this case. What follows is an extended summary of that account, sufficient to understand and frame the issues before this court.

¶ 4 Kathleen's Death

¶ 5 Around 6:30 a.m. on July 6, 2014, Kathleen's body was found dead on the railroad tracks approximately 1200 feet from the Geneva home where she lived with defendant and their three sons. Her body had not been there 30 minutes before, when an earlier train came through. A Metra crew member testified that, although he initially believed that Kathleen was still breathing when he first saw her body, he realized as he got closer that she was not breathing and that it had just been her shirt moving in the wind. When found, Kathleen's body was lying on its side, with her head and neck lying on the rail. She was wearing jogging shorts with no underwear underneath; an underwire bra and T-shirt, both of which were pulled up halfway over her breasts; clean running shoes; and ankle socks, one of which was on upside down. She was not wearing her eyeglasses or contact lenses, her earbuds, or her iPhone armband, all of which she normally wore when running. Kathleen's iPhone was found placed against a couple of railroad spikes on the opposite side of the rail from her body. The first officer arrived on the scene at 6:55 a.m. and found no pulse. Although the officer believed that Kathleen had been dead for some time, he called for paramedics because he wanted a medical opinion. When the paramedics arrived, they attached a heart monitor to the body. No heartbeat was detected, but the monitor did detect "pulseless electrical activity

," which can carry on for some time after a person dies. The paramedics did not make resuscitation efforts because it appeared that Kathleen had been deceased for quite some time. emergency medical technician Michael Antenore noted that Kathleen's skin was a "cyanotic purple" color and that her pupils were "fixed and dilated." Antenore also noted that the paramedics had mud on their shoes, due to an overnight rain, but that Kathleen's running shoes were clean. It was later determined that, at the time of her death, Kathleen's blood alcohol content was 0.15.

¶ 6 On the evening prior to Kathleen's death, she and defendant and their three sons attended a Fourth of July party at the Elk Grove Village home of Kathleen's father, Kurt Kuester. Kathleen and defendant consumed several drinks at the party. They left the party together at 10:45 p.m., while the children remained with Kurt for an overnight stay. Kathleen did not appear to have any bruises or injuries when she left the party. After leaving the party, Kathleen and defendant went to a bar in Geneva, where they both consumed several more drinks. They left the bar around 2 a.m. and headed home. A man who was at the bar and who knew the Kings testified that he did not see any bruises or injuries on Kathleen that night.

¶ 7 According to defendant, shortly after they arrived home, Kathleen began receiving text messages from Billy Keogh, a man she had met earlier that year at Army Reserve training in Texas and with whom she had since spent time and been in regular and often intimate contact. Defendant and Kathleen had argued about Keogh in the past, and they had discussed the possibility of divorce because of Kathleen's relationship with him. Around 4 a.m., defendant sent several text messages to Keogh from Kathleen's phone. These messages purported to be from Kathleen, telling Keogh that she and defendant were presently having sex. Around 4:45 a.m., defendant left the house and drove to Chase Bank, where he withdrew $500 in "pocket money" from the ATM for some car repairs that he needed. According to defendant, shortly after he returned home from the bank, Kathleen changed her clothes and went out for a run. Defendant then slept for about 30 minutes, after which he left the house to get gas, "drive round," and buy donuts. He then left to pick up his children from Kurt's house.

¶ 8 Around 10:15 a.m. on July 6, Kathleen's sister, Kristine Kuester, called Kathleen's phone. A Geneva police officer answered and told Kristine that Kathleen was dead. Kristine immediately called Kurt with the news. While Kristine was talking to Kurt, defendant showed up to pick up his boys. Kurt testified that this was surprising because defendant "never" picked up the boys. Kurt immediately asked defendant where Kathleen was, and defendant replied that they had had a fight and that Kathleen had gone out for a run to clear her head. Kurt told defendant that Kathleen was dead, to which defendant replied, "I didn't do anything. I didn't do anything." According to Kurt, during the entire time he was at Kurt's house that morning, defendant never asked what had happened to Kathleen or where she was.

¶ 9 Two Elk Grove Village police officers transported defendant from Kurt's house to the Geneva police station for an interview. According to the officers, it was 20 minutes into the ride before defendant asked what had happened to Kathleen. Over the course of two interviews with the Geneva police, defendant consistently denied any involvement in Kathleen's death.

¶ 10 Pretrial Motions

¶ 11 Following a preliminary hearing, defendant's case was assigned to Judge James C. Hallock. Prior to trial, and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2703(d) (2012), the State filed a motion seeking access to cell tower registration records for defendant's and Kathleen's cell phones for the 24 hours surrounding Kathleen's death. In response, defendant made an oral motion to declare section 2703(d) unconstitutional under the fourth amendment to the United States Constitution. U.S. Const., amend. IV. On July 17, 2014, Judge Hallock granted the State's motion seeking access to the cell tower records and denied defendant's motion to declare section 2703(d) unconstitutional. The next day, defendant moved for a substitution of judge as a matter of right, pursuant to section 114-5(a) of the Criminal Procedure of 1963 ( 725 ILCS 5/114-5 (West 2014). In a written order, another judge denied that motion after concluding that Judge Hallock made a substantive ruling when he denied defendant's oral motion to declare section 2703(d) unconstitutional.

¶ 12 The State also filed a pretrial motion in limine seeking leave to call Mark Safarik as an expert witness on "crime scene analysis." The motion stated that Safarik was a "crime scene and behavioral analyst" for a private consulting firm and that Safarik had 23 years' prior experience with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), including as a supervisor with the behavioral analysis unit. The substance of Safarik's proposed testimony was contained in a written report that was submitted separately to the trial court but is not in the record. The court granted the State's motion over defendant's objection. In so ruling, the court explained that Safarik's "specialized knowledge" was "reliable" and "relevant" and that the general subject matter of his testimony would assist the jury to understand the evidence and to determine the facts. Nevertheless, and assuming that the State succeeded in qualifying Safarik as an expert at trial, Safarik's opinions would have to be rendered "pursuant to his qualifications," and he would not be permitted to identify defendant as the killer by direct testimony. The court also ruled that Safarik would not be allowed to give profiling testimony.

¶ 13 Expert Testimony

¶ 14 The State called forensic pathologist Dr. Mitra Kalelkar, who performed Kathleen's autopsy. Dr. Kalelkar noted the clothing on the body, as described above. Dr. Kalelkar also noted the presence of antemortem (before death), postmortem (after death), and perimortem (at the time of death) abrasions and bruises, some of which were inconsistent with Kathleen having fallen or collapsed on the tracks. Specifically, she testified that an antemortem bruise under the chin was consistent with someone's hands having been around Kathleen's neck or Kathleen having tried to pry someone's hands off her neck. Dr. Kalelkar opined that an antemortem bruise on the upper left arm was consistent with someone grabbing her. In her initial autopsy report, Dr. Kalelkar listed the cause of death as "asphyxiation

," and she did not classify it as a homicide. In her trial testimony, however, she stated that the cause of death was "manual strangulation" and that she based that conclusion on certain hemorrhages that she found in Kathleen's eyes, throat, and tongue.

¶ 15 The State next called Mark Safarik, the expert witness...