People v. McGrew
| Decision Date | 27 September 2021 |
| Docket Number | 4-20-0213 |
| Parties | THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. KEITH McGREW, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
This Order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and is not precedent except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1).
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Coles County No. 19CF229 Honorable James R. Glenn, Judge Presiding.
ORDER
¶ 1 Held:
¶ 2 Following a jury trial, defendant, Keith McGrew, was found guilty of first-degree murder (720 ILCS 5/9-1(a)(1), (a)(2) (West 2018)) and the trial court sentenced him to 52 years in prison. He appeals, arguing (1) his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance, (2) the court erred by allowing the admission of certain witness testimony, (3) the State failed to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, (4) prosecutorial errors denied him his right to due process and a fair trial, and (5) the cumulative effect of the alleged errors warrants a new trial. We affirm.
¶ 4 In May 2019, the State charged defendant with three counts of first-degree murder (id. § 9-1 (a)(1) (a)(2), (b)(11)) in connection with the shooting death of Mark Currie. It alleged defendant shot Currie (1) with the intent to kill or do great bodily harm (count I) (id. § 9-1 (a)(1)); (2) knowing that such act created a strong probability of death or great bodily harm (count II) (id. § 9-1 (a)(2)); and (3) with premeditation (count III) (id. § 9-1(b)(11)). The State's theory of the case was that defendant shot Currie after becoming enraged by sexual comments Currie made to him. Defendant acknowledged that he shot Currie but maintained the act was done in self-defense during a physical confrontation and with the belief that "he was about to be raped."
¶ 5 Prior to trial, both parties filed various motions in limine. Relevant to this appeal, in December 2019 defendant filed a motion in limine "to determine witness availability and to recuse witness," asking the trial court to bar the State from calling his girlfriend, Cedrica Smith, as a witness at trial. Defendant noted Smith had been charged with obstruction of justice in connection with the underlying events and had asserted her intention to invoke her fifth amendment right against self-incrimination if called as a witness at defendant's trial. The record reflects the charge against Smith was based on allegations that she attempted to hide the gun defendant used to shoot Currie.
¶ 6 The same month, the State filed a motion in limine, seeking to admit statements Smith made to Timeka Griffin under the excited utterance exception to the hearsay rule. It noted Griffin gave a voluntary statement to the police, disclosing events that took place around the time of the shooting and describing conversations she had with Smith while Smith was "scared, agitated[, ] and crying" due to "[a]n inability to calm an enraged loved one," i.e., defendant.
¶ 7 In January 2020, the trial court conducted a hearing and addressed both motions in limine. It first granted in part, defendant's motion seeking to bar the State from calling Smith as a witness. The court found testimony related to Smith "placing the gun in a bag and taking it to a friend's house and leaving it there would tend to incriminate her" and, thus, she could invoke her fifth amendment privilege against self-incrimination as to such matters. However, the court stated Smith would have to respond to her subpoena and that it would "direct her to answer other questions that in [the] [c]ourt's view [did] not tend to incriminate her." The trial court also granted the State's motion to allow Griffin to testify about statements Smith made around the time of the shooting, agreeing they constituted excited utterances.
¶ 8 In January 2020, defendant's jury trial was conducted. The State's evidence showed that in the early morning hours of May 17, 2019, the police responded to a disturbance call at Sunrise Apartments in Mattoon, Illinois. The responding officers found Currie lying inside his mother's apartment near an open sliding glass patio door. Currie was unresponsive and had no pulse. Emergency medical personnel were called to the scene and provided medical assistance to Currie before taking him to the hospital. At the hospital, Currie was pronounced dead. An autopsy showed he suffered multiple gunshot wounds and died as the result of a gunshot wound to the chest. At the time of his death, Currie's height was 6 feet and 1 inch, and he weighed 249 pounds. Additionally, his blood and urine tested positive for the presence of cocaine, marijuana, and alcohol. Evidence showed defendant was shorter than Currie and weighed approximately 144 pounds.
¶ 9 After Currie's body was removed from the apartment complex, a crime scene investigator photographed the apartment, including an "area of disturbance" inside the apartment and near the patio door. The photographs were admitted into evidence and showed various items on the floor, an end table lying on its side, and broken items, including a lamp, fan, and blinds from the patio door.
¶ 10 Paramedic Aaron Mocek testified that he assisted Currie at the scene. He noted Currie was wearing pants that were zipped up and secured with a belt. Mocek testified his primary concern was taking care of Currie, not preserving the scene. He stated that as he rolled Currie over, one of the blinds from the patio door fell onto him and Currie. Mocek also stepped on and broke a light bulb. Further, he testified that others also assisted Currie and could have caused damage to the scene.
¶ 11 The State's evidence showed the firearm used in the shooting was recovered from the residence of Zaria Jones, who also lived at the apartment complex. Jones testified she was close friends with both Smith and Griffin and spent time with them on May 16, 2019, until approximately 7 p.m., when she returned home. Jones went to bed around 9 p.m. and, at approximately 10 p.m. and 1 a.m., received phone calls from Smith, which she did not answer. Following the last phone call, Griffin and Smith began "banging" on Jones's door and window. Jones let the women into her apartment and noticed that Smith appeared "jittery" and "nervous," and that she and Griffin were whispering. Later, after Griffin and Smith left Jones's apartment, Jones found a blue bag underneath her couch. Inside the blue bag was a gun. Jones called Smith, who "begged and pleaded" with Jones "not to say anything." Jones then confronted Griffin who was outside and in the company of the police. Following that confrontation, Jones allowed the police to search her apartment.
¶ 12 Around 7 a.m. on May 17, 2019, officers with the Mattoon Police Department, Clint Lawrence and Jeff Wines, located defendant a few miles from the Sunrise Apartment complex. He was in the backyard of a residence, walking near a cornfield. The officers described defendant as wearing no shirt or shoes and having "a dingy shower curtain draped over his shoulder." Lawrence testified that after being placed in handcuffs, defendant made statements "that he had to protect himself" or "defend himself" from an individual who "wanted to perform oral sex on him." Wines recalled defendant mentioning "something along the lines of a sexual act, some sort of request," and stating," 'he wanted me.'" He clarified that defendant "described a request or a want" but did not reference any actions taken by the other person toward defendant. Neither officer recalled seeing any injuries to defendant or hearing him complain of any injuries.
¶ 13 Smith testified for the State that in May 2019, she resided at Sunrise Apartments with her children and defendant, who was her boyfriend. She recalled that on May 16, 2019, she spent the day drinking outside with defendant and some friends. During the evening, defendant was "in and out" of her apartment. Sometime after midnight, defendant told her about someone making a comment that he did not like. According to Smith, defendant said he was outside and" [s]omeone had made a comment to him about sucking some d*** or something[.]" She testified defendant was "upset" by the comment but said "he was going to let it go."
¶ 14 Smith identified defendant on surveillance video exiting her apartment building at approximately 12:28 a.m., followed closely by herself. She denied being worried about what defendant was about to do, stating she only wanted to know where he was going and "really wanted him to stay in the house." Smith also denied that she tried to calm defendant down. Further, she testified that defendant's demeanor when he left her apartment was "jittery" and "[l]ike he couldn't relax." She also characterized him as "nervous" and "disturbed" by the comment that had been made to him. However, Smith denied that defendant was in a "rage."
¶ 15 After following defendant out of the apartment, Smith spoke to some individuals outside and visited Griffin in a nearby apartment, inquiring whether Griffin had seen defendant. While at Griffin's apartment, Smith heard a "commotion." She went outside and saw defendant who was "screaming" that" 'this m*** f*** tried to rape...
To continue reading
Request your trial