People v. Roy, 4-87-0884

• Decision Date: 14 July 1988
• Docket Number: No. 4-87-0884,4-87-0884
• Citation: 172 Ill.App.3d 16,526 N.E.2d 204
• Parties: , 122 Ill.Dec. 64 The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Randy ROY, Defendant-Appellant.
• Court: United States Appellate Court of Illinois

Page 204

526 N.E.2d 204

172 Ill.App.3d 16, 122 Ill.Dec. 64

The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Randy ROY, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 4-87-0884.

Appellate Court of Illinois,

Fourth District.

July 14, 1988.

Rehearing Denied Aug. 10, 1988.

Frederick F. Cohn, Chicago, for defendant-appellant.

Don W. Weber, State's Atty., Paxton, Kenneth R. Boyle, Director, State's Attys. Appellate Prosecutor, Springfield, Robert J. Biderman, Deputy Director, David Mannchen, Staff Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.

Justice McCULLOUGH delivered the opinion of the court:

On October 7, 1986, the defendant, Randy Roy, was indicted by the grand jury of Ford County on charges of unlawful delivery of a controlled substance (30 grams cocaine) (Ill.Rev.Stat.1985, ch. 56 1/2, par. 1401(a)(2)), calculated criminal drug conspiracy (Ill.Rev.Stat.1985, ch. 56 1/2, par. 1405), and calculated criminal cannabis conspiracy (Ill.Rev.Stat.1985, ch. 56 1/2, par. 709(a)). Following jury trial, the defendant was convicted of unlawful delivery of a controlled substance (30 grams cocaine) and calculated criminal drug conspiracy. He was subsequently sentenced to a term of eight years' imprisonment and a fine of $22,500.

The defendant appeals asserting: (1) the evidence was insufficient to sustain his convictions; (2) he was denied the constitutional right to confront the witnesses against him; and (3) the verdict forms, which failed to specify the weight of the drugs involved, were inadequate.

At trial, the State presented Mark Johnson, a Paxton resident and admitted drug dealer. Johnson was arrested on September 3, 1986, and subsequently charged with delivery of cocaine in excess of 30 grams and calculated criminal drug conspiracy. Johnson admitted he was testifying pursuant to an agreement with the State whereby certain charges pending against him were to be dismissed in exchange for his testimony.

Johnson stated that he used drugs, specifically marijuana and cocaine. He stated that he purchased his drugs from the defendant who he met in June of 1985. Johnson was introduced to the defendant by a friend of his, Bill Anderson. Johnson then asked the defendant if he could start dealing drugs and the defendant agreed. Johnson explained that the defendant fronted the drugs and he would pay the defendant after he had sold them. Usually the drugs were delivered to Johnson by a runner employed by the defendant. This runner was identified by Johnson as Bob Moore.

Johnson reiterated all of his past dealings with the defendant. Johnson estimated that he had made in excess of $100,000 in drug sales over a one-year period. Johnson sold both marijuana and cocaine. Johnson usually paid $750 to $850 per pound for marijuana and $1,800 to $1,900 per ounce for cocaine.

On August 15, 1986, Johnson contacted the defendant regarding the delivery of some cocaine. Shortly thereafter he received approximately 4 ounces of cocaine. He estimated the value of the drugs at $7,000. As in the past, Johnson did not pay for the drugs upon receipt. The drugs were delivered to his residence in Paxton by Bob Moore. Johnson additionally stated that in the late spring of 1986 he received 80 to 90 pounds of marijuana from the defendant. The marijuana was delivered in 10-pound lots.

Johnson explained that he would then distribute the marijuana to other individuals, specifically Dave Kemmitzer and Randy Hobbs. Johnson explained that he generally sold the marijuana in pound lots. Upon receipt of a new shipment, Johnson would reimburse the defendant for the previous delivery.

On the date of his arrest, September 3, 1986, Johnson was in Randy Hobbs' trailer when there was a police raid. Johnson stated that he was in possession of $9,000 cash and a half ounce of cocaine. Johnson stated that this cocaine was purchased from the defendant.

Subsequent to his arrest, Johnson's home was searched by the police. During the search, the officers confiscated a black notebook containing names, addresses, and dollar amounts. Johnson testified that this book contained names of people he sold drugs to as well as people who owed him money. Johnson admitted that neither Randy Roy nor Bob Moore were listed in the book. Johnson claimed, however, that the book was mainly a listing of debts and not drug-related transactions.

On cross-examination, Johnson explained the specifics of his plea agreement with the State in return for his testimony. Johnson stated the charge of calculated criminal conspiracy was to be dismissed. Johnson would plead to the remaining charge. Johnson was offered 4 years' probation, 90 days in the Paxton County Jail, $13,000 forfeiture of cash, and a $3,000 fine as a sentence. Johnson further stated that on October 7, 1986, he testified before the grand jury regarding the defendant's involvement in the drug trade in Paxton. At that time, Johnson named a number of individuals to whom he had sold drugs in the past. He admitted at trial that he did not name the same individuals as purchasers during his direct testimony.

The State next presented five witnesses including Todd Hofer, Brian Breymeyer, Richard Ingold, William Cofel, and Alexander Michael Dorshe. Each of these individuals testified they used illegal drugs and that they purchased either marijuana or cocaine from Mark Johnson. None of the individuals, however, knew of Randy Roy or Bob Moore.

Gary King, special agent with the Illinois Division of Criminal Investigation, Narcotics Division, testified that he made controlled buys of narcotics from Randy Hobbs, a Paxton resident. On August 22, 1986, King met Hobbs at his trailer and arranged for the purchase of a quarter ounce of cocaine. On that date, Hobbs indicated he would have to go to Champaign to obtain the drugs. Hobbs told King he would meet with him the next day. King returned the next day and purchased a quarter ounce of cocaine for $620. Laboratory results from the analysis of the drugs purchased revealed 6.7 grams of cocaine. On cross-examination, King admitted that during the purchase from Hobbs, the names of Randy Roy and Bob Moore were not mentioned.

Randy Hobbs, a Paxton resident, recently convicted of selling cocaine, testified that he purchased all of his drugs from Mark Johnson. Hobbs stated that the cocaine sold to Gary King on August 22, 1986, was purchased from Mark Johnson. On cross-examination, Hobbs claimed that he did not know Randy Roy or Bob Moore.

The State finally presented Kenneth Wurl, of the Illinois State Police, Narcotics Division. Wurl stated he assisted in the execution of a search warrant at Hobbs' trailer in Paxton on September 3, 1986. This was the date on which Mark Johnson was arrested for possession of cocaine. The cocaine recovered from Johnson was subsequently sent to the State crime lab for analysis. Test results revealed the presence of approximately 16 grams of cocaine. Wurl stated that a deal was made with Hobbs whereby Hobbs was to produce cocaine and an undercover agent in return was to deliver a certain amount of marijuana. The amount of money involved exceeded $20,000. On September 4, 1986, Wurl interviewed Johnson at Illinois State Police headquarters. At this time, Johnson indicated that he received the drugs from Bob Moore.

The defense presented two character witnesses. Michael Raleigh and Lee Bell both testified that the defendant was a moral and upright individual with a good reputation in the community.

Following deliberations, the jury returned verdicts of guilty on all three counts, unlawful delivery of a controlled substance, calculated criminal drug conspiracy, and calculated criminal cannabis conspiracy. Following a hearing on defendant's post-trial motion, the court vacated the conviction for calculated criminal cannabis conspiracy. The defendant was subsequently sentenced to a term of eight years' imprisonment and a fine of $22,500.

The defendant initially challenges the sufficiency of the evidence. Defendant claims the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice, who testifies pursuant to a deal with the State's Attorney, standing alone, cannot support a conviction.

The standard of review of criminal convictions is well established. A conviction will not be set aside unless the evidence is so improbable or unsatisfactory that it creates a reasonable doubt of the defendant's guilt. People v. Byron (1987), 116 Ill.2d 81, 89-90, 107 Ill.Dec. 192, 195, 506 N.E.2d 1247, 1250, quoting People v. Collins (1985), 106 Ill.2d 237, 261, 87 Ill.Dec. 910, 919, 478 N.E.2d 267, 276.

In Collins, the Illinois Supreme Court adopted the standard as enunciated in Jackson v. Virginia (1979), 443 U.S. 307, 319, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 2789, 61 L.Ed.2d 560, 573, quoting:

" '[T]he relevant question is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.' " ( Collins, 106 Ill.2d at 261, 87 Ill.Dec. at 920, 478 N.E.2d at 277.)

The court went on to note:

" '[o]nce a defendant has been found guilty of the crime charged, the factfinder's role as weigher of the evidence is preserved through a legal conclusion that upon judicial review all of the evidence is to be considered in the light most favorable to the prosecution.' (Emphasis in original.) 443 U.S. 307, 319, 61 L.Ed.2d 560, 573, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 2789." Collins, 106 Ill.2d at 261, 87 Ill.Dec. at 920, 478 N.E.2d at 277.

The uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice can be sufficient to sustain a conviction where the jury is convinced beyond a reasonable doubt. ( Byron, 116 Ill.2d 81, 107 Ill.Dec. 192, 506 N.E.2d 1247; Collins, 106 Ill.2d 237, 87 Ill.Dec. 910, 478 N.E.2d 267.) The problems inherent in accomplice testimony are well recognized. An accomplice may have been promised leniency or harbor ill will toward the accused. (People v. Newell (1984), 103 Ill.2d 465, 83 Ill.Dec. 229, 469 N.E.2d 1375.) Consequently, such...