People v. Redman

• Decision Date: 06 March 1986
• Docket Number: No. 4-85-0356,4-85-0356
• Citation: People v. Redman, 141 Ill.App.3d 691, 490 N.E.2d 958, 95 Ill.Dec. 866 (Ill. App. 1986)
• Parties: , 95 Ill.Dec. 866 The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Steve REDMAN, Defendant-Appellant.
• Court: United States Appellate Court of Illinois

Page 958

490 N.E.2d 958

141 Ill.App.3d 691, 95 Ill.Dec. 866

The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v.Steve REDMAN, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 4-85-0356.

Appellate Court of Illinois Fourth District.

March 6, 1986.

Daniel D. Yuhas, Deputy Defender, Office of State Appellate Defender, Springfield, Jeffrey D. Foust, Asst. Defender, for defendant-appellant.

J. William Roberts, State's Atty., Kenneth R. Boyle, Director, State's Attys.Appellate Service Com'n, Springfield, Robert J. Biderman, Deputy Director, Kevin T. McClain, Staff Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.

McCULLOUGH, Presiding Justice:

Following a jury trial in the circuit court of Sangamon County, defendant, Steve Redman, was convicted of rape in violation of section 12-13 of the Criminal Code of 1961(Ill.Rev.Stat., 1984 Supp., ch. 38, par. 12-13) and home invasion in violation of section 12-11 of the Criminal Code of 1961(Ill.Rev.Stat.1983, ch. 38, par. 12-11).Defendant was sentenced to 22 years of imprisonment.Defendant appeals.We now affirm.

Defendant was charged by information with the rape of the complainant and the home invasion of complainant's home.

Prior to trial defendant filed a motion in limine requesting that the State be precluded from impeaching defendant's credibility with defendant's prior convictions, July 24, 1984, for rape, deviate sexual assault, armed robbery, and a prior conviction, theft over $300, May 7, 1980.The court denied the motion and ruled that all four prior convictions were admissible for impeachment purposes.

A jury trial was held.The following witnesses testified on behalf of the State.

The 18-year-old complainant testified that in May 1984she lived in a two-bedroom house in Springfield, Illinois.Complainant lived with a roommate, Kathy Prosise.

During the afternoon of May 22, 1984, complainant, Prosise, and another friend, Debbie Durheim, drove to Lake Springfield for a party at which they met defendant.After the partycomplainant returned home.While complainant was home alone, defendant came to her residence looking for Prosise.Defendant waited until Prosise returned.When Prosise returned, she and defendant went into Prosise's bedroom.Defendant spent the night with Prosise.Complainant next saw defendant as he was walking out of the bathroom the following morning.

During the evening of May 25, 1984, Prosise stayed with Durheim's children at Durheim's home while Durheim and complainant drove around and talked.Before she had gone out with Durheim, complainant had not seen defendant at her own residence.On cross-examination complainant stated that Prosise had told her earlier that she would be spending the night at Durheim's residence.

At approximately 2:15 a.m. on May 27, 1984, complainant returned home alone.At approximately 2:30 a.m. complainant went to bed and to sleep, leaving the lights on as she ordinarily did.

At approximately 3 a.m. complainant awoke, believing that she heard the storm door rattling.When complainant entered the living room she saw defendant without a shirt.On cross-examination complainant stated that she did not see a ring on defendant's right hand.Defendant immediately switched off the ceiling light which had been on in the living room.

When complainant asked defendant why he was there, defendant responded that he had heard someone say "Come in."When complainant responded that no one had said, "Come in,"defendant stated, "Well, it must have been on the radio."No radio was on at the time.When defendant asked about Prosise's whereabouts, complainant told him that Prosise was at Durheim's residence.On cross-examination complainant stated that defendant said that Prosise told him to meet her at her own residence.Complainant also stated on cross-examination that she was not afraid of defendant since he had stated he came to see Prosise.Defendant asked if he could use the bathroom and complainant responded that he could.Although a telephone was present, complainant did not telephone anyone while defendant was in the bathroom.

When defendant came out of the bathroom he was holding a knife approximately six to seven inches long.He put a hand on complainant's shoulder and told her to do exactly as he said or he would kill her.Defendant pushed complainant into her bedroom, shoved her onto the bed, and forced her to have sexual intercourse with him.Complainant stated that defendant did not ejaculate during intercourse.Afterwards defendant apologized profusely and drove away in his automobile.

After defendant left, complainant was frightened, so she decided to leave.She first drove to her boyfriend's house, but he was not at home.She next drove to Durheim's residence.Complainant told Prosise and Durheim that she had been raped by defendant.Complainant then went to the hospital, and the police were notified.

Complainant testified that prior to May 26, 1984, the window screens on the outside of the house had not been cut.Upon her return home from the hospital, complainant saw that the window screen outside Prosise's bedroom had been cut.Photographs of the house and the cut screen were identified and admitted into evidence.

Complainant identified two exhibits as photographs of her face taken the day after the rape which depicted a mark upon her lip.Complainant testified that the mark resulted from defendant slapping her during the rape.

On May 31, 1984, complainant attended a lineup at which she identified defendant as her assailant.

Kathy Prosise testified next.She stated that she met defendant at a party at Lake Springfield on May 22, 1984, and that defendant stayed with her in her bedroom the night of the party.Prosise's testimony substantially corroborated complainant's testimony with respect to the events at Durheim's residence before and after the alleged rape.Prosise stated that she had not seen defendant at her residence prior to going over to Durheim's residence on May 25, 1984.Prosise added that complainant was carrying a knife when she arrived at Durheim's house at approximately 4 a.m.

Prosise also testified that when she returned home on May 26, 1984, she noticed that her bed had been moved and that the alarm clock which normally sat on the windowsill had been knocked onto the floor.Prosise stated that she normally leaves her window open six inches.She did not look at her window until several days later, at which time she noticed that the screen had been cut.

Debbie Durheim's testimony also corroborated complainant's testimony concerning the party at Lake Springfield and the events immediately before and after the alleged rape.

Joseph Goulet, a detective with the Springfield police department, testified that on May 26, 1984, he spoke with complainant at Memorial Hospital in Springfield.On cross-examination, Officer Goulet stated that he did not see any visible marks of injury on complainant.Officer Goulet also stated during cross-examination that complainant made no mention of the initial conversation which complainant stated took place between her and defendant in the living room.After speaking with complainant, Prosise, and Durheim, Officer Goulet directed other officers to go to defendant's residence and arrest him for sexual assault.

When defendant was brought to Officer Goulet's office, he was immediately advised of his constitutional rights.Defendant told Officer Goulet that he had stopped by complainant's residence at approximately 7 p.m. on May 25, 1984, and had spoken with complainant and Prosise.Defendant stated that later in the evening he went out on a date with a girl named Linda whose last name defendant did not know.Defendant stated that he took Linda to her home approximately at midnight and then he went immediately home.Defendant told Officer Goulet that he met complainant at Lake Springfield the previous week.Defendant stated that he neither touched complainant nor had sexual intercourse with her.

Officer Goulet testified that during the course of his investigation, he investigated complainant's residence.During the investigation Officer Goulet saw fresh footprints in the mud and trampled weeds in different locations around the house.The weeds around the house were approximately a foot high, and Officer Goulet became wet as he walked among the weeds.Officer Goulet also saw that the screen outside the window of Prosise's room had been slashed.Also during the course of his investigation Officer Goulet went to defendant's residence to supervise a search for a knife, but no knife was found.

Margaret Barrett, a Springfield police officer, testified that she went to Memorial Hospital a little after 4:00 a.m. on May 26, 1984, to assist in taking a rape report.She then went to defendant's residence to arrest him.When Officer Barrett advised defendanthe was under arrest for rape, he denied having committed the offense.As defendant dressed he picked up a pair of wet pants and said, "I'm not going to put these on.They got wet last night."Officer Barrett saw that the pants were wet from the bottom of the shin area on both legs.Lying next to the pants was a pair of leather work boots which were muddy and covered with small pieces of weeds and grass near the sole.Officer Barrett identified two exhibits as the pair of pants and the pair of boots which were taken from defendant's bedroom.

Bonnie Lowe, a crime scene technician, testified that the grass around complainant's house was high but had been trampled along the edge of the house.Lowe dusted the house for fingerprints.No suitable fingerprints could be lifted from the inside of the house.Lowe found a fingerprint on the right hand side of the window outside Prosise's bedroom.William Sours, an evidence technician for the Springfield police department and an expert in fingerprint analysis, identified the fingerprint found by Lowe as the print of defendant's right thumb.Sours identified 16 characteristics common to...