People v. Olaska

• Decision Date: 19 December 2017
• Docket Number: No. 2–15–0567,2–15–0567
• Citation: 2017 IL App (2d) 150567,92 N.E.3d 1013
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. Daniel J. OLASKA, Defendant–Appellant.
• Court: United States Appellate Court of Illinois

2017 IL App (2d) 150567

92 N.E.3d 1013

The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff–Appellee,

v.Daniel J. OLASKA, Defendant–Appellant.

No. 2–15–0567

Appellate Court of Illinois, Second District.

Opinion filed December 19, 2017

Douglas H. Johnson, of Kathleen T. Zellner & Associates, P.C., of Downers Grove, for appellant.

Robert B. Berlin, State's Attorney, of Wheaton (Edward R. Psenicka and Lisa A. Hoffman, Assistant State's Attorneys, of counsel), for the People.

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

¶ 1 Defendant, Daniel J. Olaska, appeals his conviction of first-degree murder ( 720 ILCS 5/9–1(a)(2) (West 2012)), arising from the stabbings of Willie Hayes and Shaun Wild in downtown Naperville in February 2012. Defendant makes nine individual contentions of error, most of which fall into the following broad areas: (1) the sufficiency of the evidence to support his murder convictions; (2) the adequacy of the jury instructions on aggravated battery ( 720 ILCS 5/12–3.05(a)(1) (West 2012)), which was an uncharged predicate offense for the charge of felony murder ( 720 ILCS 5/9–1(a)(3) (West 2012)); and (3) the propriety of the State's examination of a police officer concerning defendant's postarrest silence. For the following reasons, we affirm.

¶ 2 I. BACKGROUND

¶ 3 A. Introduction

¶ 4 Among the patrons at Frankie's Blue Room (Frankie's) in Naperville in the midnight hour of February 4, 2012, were defendant, Hayes, and Wild. Defendant had arrived at Frankie's with his friend Steve Blacksmith, who had since left. Hayes and Wild knew each other from their time on the football team at North Central College (NCC). Also present at Frankie's were several other past or present members of the NCC football team, including Peter Bulandr, Will Thrun, Bradley Crackel, Jordan Tassio, Josh Sartori, Scott Skuteris, Andrew Trybula, and Paul Yuccas. Defendant had not met Hayes or Wild before that night. Shortly before 1 a.m. on February 4, defendant had a conversation with Hayes while both were seated in a booth. Trial witnesses variously described the conversation, but all agreed that it grew heated. During the verbal escalation, Wild and several other associates of Hayes's were near the booth. The encounter culminated in defendant producing a knife from his pocket and stabbing Hayes in the chest. Defendant then walked away from the booth. Wild pursued and caught up to defendant. Their encounter, too, was subject to conflicting accounts at trial. Defendant stabbed Wild in the arm and chest before being restrained by Rafael Castaneda, one of Frankie's bouncers. In his struggle with defendant, Castaneda received a knife wound to the arm. Hayes and Castaneda survived but Wild died from his chest wound.

¶ 5 In March 2012, a grand jury indicted defendant on 14 counts. Defendant went to trial on 10 counts: 2 counts of intentional murder ( 720 ILCS 5/9–1(a)(1) (West 2012)); 3 counts of knowing murder ( 720 ILCS 5/9–1(a)(1), (a)(2) (West 2012)), 2 counts of felony murder ( 720 ILCS 5/9–1(a)(3) (West 2012)) predicated respectively on aggravated battery (Hayes) ( 720 ILCS 5/12–3.05(a)(1) (West 2012)) and attempted murder (Hayes) ( 720 ILCS 5/8–4(a), 9–1(a) (West 2012)); 2 counts of attempted murder (Hayes and Castaneda) ( 720 ILCS 5/8–4(a), 9–1(a) (West 2012)); and 1 count of unlawful use of a weapon ( 720 ILCS 5/24–1(a)(8) (West 2012)). Prior to trial, the State dismissed four counts of armed violence (Hayes and Castaneda) ( 720 ILCS 5/33A–2(a) (West 2012)).

¶ 6 The defense gave notice of its intent to claim at trial that the stabbings of Hayes and Wild were in self-defense. The trial was held over several days in March 2015. The evidence consisted of over 30 witnesses, several hours of video footage from six interior security cameras at Frankie's, and audio recordings of defendant's phone conversations with family members while he was in jail awaiting trial.

¶ 7 The parties presented pointedly different theories of what motivated defendant to stab Hayes and Wild. The defense proposed as follows. Defendant was in fear not only of Hayes, who was seated in the booth across from defendant, but also of other current or former NCC football players who were standing near the booth, one of whom (Tassio) physically prevented defendant from leaving the booth at one point. Defendant stabbed Hayes defensively, only after Hayes threatened him with physical violence and lunged across the table at him. After stabbing Hayes, defendant left to avoid further danger but in the process was grabbed from behind by someone whom he thought was Hayes. Out of fear, defendant stabbed the person, who turned out to be Wild.

¶ 8 According to the State's theory, defendant grew sullen and belligerent at Frankie's after another patron, Sarah Schwenn, spurned his romantic advances. Defendant became, in the State's words, a "ticking time bomb." At one point in the evening, Schwenn danced with another man, John Reynolds. Defendant later approached Reynolds, displayed a knife to him, and uttered an apparent threat. Sometime after this, defendant approached another patron, Gina Gargaro, and verbally abused her for no apparent reason. Subsequently, when defendant was with Hayes in the booth, Hayes's teammates did not attempt to trap defendant in the booth. Defendant showed no fear of Hayes or his associates, and at no point was defendant justified in using deadly force—a stab to the chest—against Hayes. According to the State, defendant's movements after stabbing Hayes were an attempt to escape following an unjustified deadly attack, and therefore defendant was not legally justified in using deadly force to ward off Wild's attempt to apprehend him.

¶ 9 Both parties claimed support for their theories in the security footage. The State also claimed that the audio recordings of the jail phone calls showed that defendant, at the insistence of family members, fabricated his self-defense theory.

¶ 10 B. Testimony in the State's Case

¶ 11 1. Defendant's Interaction with Bar Patrons Before Encountering Hayes

¶ 12 Frankie's is a second-floor establishment. There are two entrances by stairs: the north (or front) entrance and the south (or rear) entrance. The interior space is arranged as follows. East of the north entrance is the stage, which is elevated two steps above the dance floor to the south. On the west end of the dance floor is a series of booths, numbered consecutively from north to south. The booths are lined up against a low wall that separates the dance floor from the bar area to the west. Defendant stabbed Hayes in one of those booths, identified at trial as booth No. 4. There are also tables in the northwest corner of the dance floor. Defendant stabbed Wild near one of those tables, and Castaneda restrained defendant in that same area. South of the dance floor is the DJ booth and the south entrance.

¶ 13 Schwenn testified that she and her friend Keli Jepson arrived at Frankie's about 10:30 p.m. on February 3, 2012. While ordering drinks, they met defendant and Blacksmith. They also met Emmanuel Valadez. Schwenn danced with Valadez. Later, while Jepson danced with Valadez, Schwenn danced with defendant. He touched her more than she preferred, running his hands up and down her waist and hips. After Schwenn and defendant danced for 5 to 10 minutes, Schwenn and Jepson went outside so that Schwenn could have a cigarette. While they were outside, defendant came out and spoke on his cell phone. They overhead him say that he was going to stay at Frankie's and find his own ride home. When Schwenn and Jepson reentered Frankie's, defendant followed them. Schwenn and Jepson left defendant and went to the end of the bar opposite him. Schwenn was no longer interested in spending time with defendant. While at the other end of the bar, Schwenn met Reynolds and danced with him. While she was dancing, defendant approached and placed a beer in her hand. Schwenn had not asked for the beer. Defendant then went to booth No. 4 and put his coat down. Later, while Schwenn was still dancing with Reynolds, defendant approached and Reynolds walked away. After dancing with defendant for a minute or two, Schwenn stopped and stood on the dance floor. Defendant grabbed her and began dancing with her again. Schwenn thanked defendant for the beer and said that she just wanted to spend time with her friends. Defendant walked over to booth No. 4, took his coat, and walked away. According to Schwenn, this occurred shortly after midnight.

¶ 14 Schwenn stated that, soon after defendant walked away, Reynolds approached and they danced. After about 10 minutes, they went to the bar together, holding hands. Schwenn decided to smoke again outside. After retrieving her coat from booth No. 4, she went to the bar to get Jepson and saw defendant talking with Reynolds. Schwenn thought that this was unusual. When she and Jepson returned from outside, she put her coat back down in booth No. 4. She saw defendant approach and walked away. She was on the dance floor shortly before 12:30 a.m. when she saw Jepson seated in booth No. 4 with defendant. They were on the same bench, with Jepson on the inside. Schwenn got Valadez's attention and said that they needed to "rescue" Jepson. They walked over to the booth. When Valadez invited Jepson to dance, defendant would not move to let her out of the booth. Jepson had to climb over defendant to get out. Schwenn, Jepson, and Valadez then danced. They were about 5 to 10 feet from booth No. 4. Defendant sat facing them with no emotion on his face. Schwenn testified that this was "creepy at points" and made her uncomfortable. She admitted, though, that it was "nothing major."

¶ 15 Later, but still before 12:30 a.m., Schwenn's attention was again drawn to booth No. 4, where she witnessed defendant arguing with a woman over sports. They raised their voices and pointed at each other. The argument appeared genuine and not playful. Not wanting to become involved, Schwenn...