People v. Penn

Decision Date22 February 2022
Docket Number4-21-0084
Citation2022 IL App (4th) 210084 U
PartiesTHE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JOHN O. PENN, Defendant-Appellant.
CourtUnited 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 Circuit Court of Adams County No. 19CF1020 Honorable Robert K. Adrian, Judge Presiding.

HOLDER WHITE, JUSTICE delivered the judgment of the court. Justices DeArmond and Steigmann concurred in the judgment.

ORDER
HOLDER WHITE, JUSTICE

¶ 1 Held: The appellate court reversed and remanded for a new discharge hearing, concluding trial counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel where she failed to (1) request a sanity evaluation of defendant and (2) raise the affirmative defense of insanity before the discharge hearing.

¶ 2 Defendant, John O. Penn, appeals from the trial court's judgment finding him not not guilty of (1) threatening a public official (720 ILCS 5/12-9 (West 2018)), (2) aggravated assault (720 ILCS 5/12-2(b)(4.1)(ii) (West 2018)), and (3) resisting a peace officer (720 ILCS 5/31-1(a) (West 2018)). On appeal, defendant argues (1) the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he intended to communicate a threat of unlawful violence to police officers and (2) ineffective assistance where his counsel failed to (a) request a sanity evaluation of defendant and (b) raise the affirmative defense of insanity before the discharge hearing. We reverse and remand.

¶ 3 I. BACKGROUND

¶ 4 On January 2, 2020, an Adams County grand jury returned a bill of indictment charging defendant with (1) threatening a public official (720 ILCS 5/12-9 (West 2018)), (2) aggravated assault (720 ILCS 5/12-2(b) (4.1) (ii) (West 2018)), and (3) resisting a peace officer (720 ILCS 5/31-1(a) (West 2018)). The charges stemmed from an incident on December 25, 2019 where defendant interacted with two police officers and "stated to Officer Katie Dolbeare and Officer Megan Dolbeare that he would kill them, shoot them, and hit them."

¶ 5 During pretrial hearings, defendant made numerous indiscernible comments, and on at least two occasions defendant had outbursts which resulted in his removal from the hearing. On January 6, 2020, defense counsel filed a suggestion of fitness and motion for examination. In the motion, defense counsel stated, "Counsel has met with Defendant in person and as a result of these conversations has grave concern as to whether the defendant has [the] ability to assist counsel in preparation of her defense." At a January 15, 2020, hearing on the motion for fitness examination, defendant stated, "I-I think I'm fit. It's just a misunderstanding of the-my door." The trial court granted counsel's request for a fitness evaluation.

¶ 6 A. Fitness Evaluation

¶ 7 On January 16, 2020, clinical psychologist Frank Froman Ed.D., conducted a psychological evaluation of defendant and created a psychological report based on his findings. According to the report, defendant lived in a hotel before his incarceration, and he told Dr. Froman, "I got locked out at two in the morning, had problems, got arrested, and now I'm in jail." Defendant indicated he had "kids," but he could not remember how many. Defendant also informed Dr. Froman that he used to take a variety of psychiatric medication but he had not taken any for some time. Defendant indicated he was a former patient at Transitions. Defendant also admitted to five or six psychiatric admissions over his life, but he told Dr. Froman, "I don't know why." Defendant struggled with sleep, and he told Dr Froman, "I try to stay awake as long as I can." Defendant also alleged he was an electrical engineer, but he failed to understand basic vocabulary related to engineering.

¶ 8 Dr. Froman noted defendant's "presentation was problematic. He tended to 'over-talk' the examiner, and also tended to present materials over and over again, never seeming to be satisfied by one presentation, repeating again and again the same things." Dr. Froman provided, "It was very difficult to get him to truly focus on the intent of the question, and he seemed to have the very strong need to 'tell long stories.'" As to the December 25, 2019, incident, defendant told Dr. Froman "a convoluted, and impossible to understand story about what happened, about the police coming, and about them arresting him. He was never able to identify exactly why they did that."

¶ 9 During his mental status examination, defendant knew basic information like the date and current president. However, defendant was "unaware of any recent news." Defendant also did not know the identity of his public defender, and when Dr. Froman tried to go through defendant's understanding of his rights, Dr. Froman stopped at" 'you have a right to remain silent,' since [defendant] had difficulty fully comprehending it."

¶ 10 Dr. Froman stated defendant appeared "hypomanic, easily confused, easily overwhelmed, and has great difficulty focusing on relatively clear questions." Dr. Froman also determined defendant showed "evidence of a true bipolar disorder." Dr. Froman provided defendant "is now in a state of significant confusion. In this state, he should not be viewed as 'competent to stand trial.'" Specifically, Dr. Froman stated, "Currently, I do not see him as trial ready, not able to cooperate effectively with his attorney, therefore, do not find him fit. He should be able to be stabilized within 30 days of treatment from Transitions if they will see him again."

¶ 11 B. Fitness Hearing

¶ 12 On February 13, 2020, the trial court held a fitness hearing. At the hearing, the State argued Dr. Froman's report was clear that defendant was not competent to stand trial at the present time. The State recommended the court order defendant to the Illinois Department of Human Services (IDHS) for "treatment to try to make him fit." Defense counsel stated, "Your Honor, I'm in agreement. I believe he is not currently fit. It appears Dr. Froman believes he can be made fit, but at this point in time, he is not." Accordingly, the court found defendant unfit to stand trial at the present time and referred defendant to IDHS for treatment "until he is found to be fit." Subsequently, IDHS admitted defendant to Alton Mental Health Center.

¶ 13 C. Fitness Progress Reports

¶ 14 IDHS generated and filed 90-day fitness to stand trial progress reports which detailed defendant's mental state. In a July 27, 2020, fitness report, the treating psychiatrist described defendant's primary diagnosis as "Schizoaffective Disorder, Bipolar Type." As to defendant's current mental status, the report stated," [Defendant] perseverates on the wrongs he perceives being done to him in the recent charges and in past legal issues and verbalizes multiple persecutory delusions regarding various police departments and courts. He exhibits manic symptoms such as dancing around his room all night and preaching from his bible loudly at all hours." The report further provided defendant's "insight and judgment remain poor." The report indicated defendant's "symptoms would prevent him from working with his attorney in a courtroom setting in [a] calm, cooperative[, ] and appropriate manner." The treating psychiatrist concluded defendant was unfit to stand trial but that he was likely to attain fitness within the statutory time period of one year.

¶ 15 In an October 27, 2020, fitness report, the treating psychiatrist indicated defendant took psychotropic medication and participated in treatment. The report provided that when discussing the topic of legal charges or court proceedings, defendant exhibited "sporadic and unpredictable outbursts of agitation, paranoia, and verbal aggression." Defendant "often reverts back to stating that he does not have charges and that the court and the treatment team are trying to conspire against him and hold him illegally." The treating psychiatrist concluded defendant was unfit to stand trial and he was unlikely to attain fitness within the statutory period of a year from the finding of unfitness.

¶ 16 On December 2, 2020, in response to the finding that defendant was unlikely to attain fitness within the statutory period, defense counsel requested the trial court set the matter for a discharge hearing. The court found defendant remained unfit and there was a substantial probability he would not attain fitness within one year of the finding of unfitness. Subsequently, the court scheduled a discharge hearing.

¶ 17 D. Discharge Hearing

¶ 18 On February 5, 2021, the trial court held a discharge hearing. At the hearing, Quincy, Illinois, police officers Megan Dolbeare and Katie Dolbeare testified on behalf of the State. Both officers testified that on December 25, 2019 around 4:30 a.m., they responded to the Welcome Inn in Quincy for "a disturbance for a male that was yelling, cursing, and knocking on doors." Both officers identified defendant as the male at the Welcome Inn and testified they knew defendant from previous contacts. Upon arrival at the Welcome Inn, the officers determined defendant was angry and upset because he had been locked out of his room. The officers attempted to de-escalate the situation by contacting the property manager and maintenance. However, Officer Megan Dolbeare testified, "Nobody was coming." The officers then tried to contact defendant's emergency contact, but the contact was out of state.

¶ 19 Both officers testified that, while they tried to reach defendant's emergency contact, defendant approached the officers. Officer Megan Dolbeare testified that, when defendant approached them, he "made several threats, and then he spit at us." When defendant...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT