People v. Lee, 102017 ILCA1, 1-15-0099
| Judge | PRESIDING JUSTICE HOFFMAN delivered the judgment of the court. Justices Connors and Delort concurred in the judgment. |
| Parties | THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. TROY LEE, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Date | 20 October 2017 |
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
| Docket Number | 1-15-0099 |
This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1).
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County No. 14 CR 2549 Honorable Evelyn B. Clay, Judge, Presiding.
PRESIDING JUSTICE HOFFMAN delivered the judgment of the court. Justices Connors and Delort concurred in the judgment.
ORDER
HOFFMAN JUSTICE
¶ 1 Held: We affirm the defendant's convictions over his contention that the trial court improperly admitted three prior convictions for impeachment purposes in violation of People v. Montgomery, 47 Ill.2d 510 (1971), where he is not able to establish plain error as a result. We vacate and reduce the defendant's sentence for possession of burglary tools and further remand for a proper preliminary inquiry under People v. Krankel, 102 Ill.2d 181 (1984).
¶ 2 Following a bench trial, the defendant, Troy Lee, was convicted of burglary (720 ILCS 19-1(a) (West 2014)) and possession of burglary tools (720 ILCS 19-2 (West 2014)), and sentenced to two concurrent terms of six years' imprisonment. On appeal, the defendant argues that the trial court: (1) failed to conduct an adequate inquiry into his posttrial claims of ineffective assistance of counsel; (2) erred in admitting his prior convictions; and (3) improperly imposed an extended-term sentence. For the following reasons, we affirm the defendant's convictions, vacate and reduce his sentence for possession of burglary tools, and remand for a proper inquiry into his pro se claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.
¶ 3 At the defendant's July 29, 2014, trial, Cathy Whinna testified that, on January 14, 2014, she was working as the director of facility services at Catholic Charities, located at 651 West Lake Street in Chicago. Whinna explained that the basement of the Catholic Charities building has a lunchroom, a bathroom, and storage rooms, which contain donations of toys, clothes, and small household items. In order to reach the basement, a guest must check-in with the receptionist, who then contacts the person the guest is visiting. There is another entrance located at the back of the building, which is unlocked at certain hours of the day. Guests are not allowed to go downstairs to look for services unescorted.
¶ 4 Whinna received a call from the front desk, spoke with Ricardo Guerra and Martin Garcia, and went to the front desk area. She viewed a security video of a locked, basement storage room and saw an individual wearing a long gray coat inside, who did not have permission to be there. The individual, later identified in court as the defendant, was picking through boxes of children's coats, bags of toys, and other household items. The defendant had a "carrying case" and was collecting boxes and bags near the door. Eventually, the defendant turned off the light and exited the storage room. Whinna called the police and went downstairs where Carlos Loera and Garcia had detained the defendant.
¶ 5 Whinna viewed the door to the storage room and did not initially see any damage. After the defendant was detained, she noticed that the doorknob was broken and there were pry marks "all up and down the door." The defendant did not have permission to enter the basement storage area of Catholic Charities and he was not receiving any services that day.
¶ 6 Whinna testified to the events captured in the security video, which she stated accurately depicted the events she witnessed when watching at the front desk. The video, which was entered into evidence and which we have reviewed, shows the defendant enter the room and place something from his hand into his shoulder bag. He then leaves the camera's view for a short period of time, before returning. The defendant picks up various boxes and bags of clothes and moves them around. He takes more boxes and stacks them on top of each other. He then appears to press something into the boxes and places his fingers inside them like gripping a handle. The defendant continues to move the boxes and bags around and stack them into different piles. The lights turn off momentarily but turn back on. Eventually, the defendant walks past the boxes, opens the door slightly, pauses, and walks out of the storage room, closing the door behind him.
¶ 7 Carlos Loera testified that he was ending his shift as a security guard at Catholic Charities when he received a call from Garcia and returned to the front desk area. He observed on the security monitor a suspicious individual dressed in a gray jacket going through boxes and bags in a storage room. Loera went downstairs, saw Garcia, and observed the individual, identified in court as the defendant, exiting from the storage room depicted on the security monitor. The defendant was holding a black bag. Loera asked the defendant what he was doing in the basement, and the defendant stated that he was looking for a restroom.
¶ 8 Loera asked to see the defendant's identification and escorted him to the lunchroom area until police arrived. Loera did not "buzz" the defendant into Catholic Charities during his shift as a security guard.
¶ 9 Ricardo Guerra testified that he was working as a security guard at Catholic Charities when he observed on the security monitor a suspicious person, identified in court as the defendant, in the basement. Guerra did not "buzz" the defendant into the building or allow him permission to go into the basement. He then called Garcia and remained at the front desk. On the monitor, Guerra observed Loera go into the basement.
¶ 10 Chicago police officer Traan testified that he responded to a call of a burglary in progress at Catholic Charities. After arriving, he was "buzzed" in and proceeded to the lunch room area in the basement. Traan observed an individual, identified in court as the defendant, being detained by three security guards. After speaking with the security guards, Traan placed the defendant in custody and searched him and his black bag. Traan recovered a chisel, screwdriver, and a roll of tape from the black bag.
¶ 11 The defendant testified that he had been receiving assistance from Catholic Charities at a different location for the past 10 or 12 years, in the form of financial aid, food, and clothing. Seeking financial assistance for his rent payment, he drove to the Catholic Charities location at 651 West Lake for the first time. The defendant parked his car on Des Plaines Street and entered the unlocked front door of Catholic Charities. He learned from the directory that Catholic Charities was located on the third floor of the building, so he took the elevator to that floor. The defendant asked a receptionist about financial assistance; then, asked to use the bathroom. He took the elevator to the basement to use the bathroom.
¶ 12 In the basement, the defendant encountered dead ends and several doors but could not find the bathroom. Eventually, he found an open door to a storage room. The defendant walked in because he "wanted to see what it was" and looked around by reading the labels on boxes. He looked around to see if there was anything he could use that he could then ask Catholic Charities to provide him for free, as it has done in the past. As he left the storage room, he encountered three or four security guards who surrounded him. The defendant denied breaking into the storage room with a chisel and screwdriver. He testified he had on him two screwdrivers which he used to "pop" the locks of his car when the cold weather caused them to "stick."
¶ 13 On cross-examination, the defendant testified that he "wasn't in [the storage room] that long" and was only reading the labels on the boxes. He denied stacking the boxes by the front door, but explained that, after he took a box and read the label, he would then move the next box over. The defendant denied cutting into the boxes, and testified that he "was trying to see to read the label." He further denied parking his car in the alley behind Catholic Charities. The defendant was shown a photograph, People's Exhibit No. 6, and admitted that the car depicted in it looked like his and appeared to be parked in an alley. However, he testified that he did not park his car where it was depicted in the photograph.
¶ 14 In rebuttal, Whinna testified that she observed a blue car parked in the alley behind Catholic Charities about an hour after the incident with the defendant took place. She identified People's Exhibit No. 6 as a photograph of the blue car she saw parked in the alley behind Catholic Charities. This photograph was admitted into evidence.
¶ 15 The State then offered certified copies of the defendant's previous convictions. The following colloquy occurred: "[ASSISTANT STATE'S ATTORNEY]: State would like to offer People's Exhibit No. 7, 8, and 9 in rebuttal, which People's Exhibit No. 7 is a certified copy of conviction under docket No. 08 CR 2248901 for [the defendant] for a retail theft conviction, May 11, 2009-
THE COURT: Just one moment.
***
[ASSISTANT STATE'S ATTORNEY]: People's [E]xhibit No. 8 for identification is a certified copy of conviction under docket 03 CR 137501, [the defendant], which is a conviction for burglary, on five-May 6, 2004, and People's [E]xhibit No. 9, which would be a certified statement of conviction under docket No. 01 CR-
[DEFENSE COUNSEL]: Objection, your Honor, that's not within 10 years.
[ASSISTANT STATE'S ATTORNEY]: It is, Judge, if you exclude time spent in custody.
[DEFENSE COUNSEL]: Overruled.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial