People v. Ryder

• Decision Date: 11 July 2019
• Docket Number: NO. 5-16-0027,5-16-0027
• Citation: People v. Ryder, 2019 IL App (5th) 160027, 133 N.E.3d 1100, 433 Ill.Dec. 820 (Ill. App. 2019)
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. David W. RYDER, Defendant-Appellant.
• Court: Appellate Court of Illinois

2019 IL App (5th) 160027

133 N.E.3d 1100

433 Ill.Dec. 820

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

v.David W. RYDER, Defendant-Appellant.

NO. 5-16-0027

Appellate Court of Illinois, Fifth District.

July 11, 2019

James E. Chadd, Jacqueline L. Bullard, and John M. McCarthy, of State Appellate Defender’s Office, of Springfield, for appellant.

Brendan F. Kelly, State’s Attorney, of Belleville (Patrick Delfino, Thomas D. Arado, and Chelsea E. Kasten, of State’s Attorneys Appellate Prosecutor’s Office, of counsel), for the People.

James E. Chadd, State Appellate Defender, Jacqueline L. Bullard, Deputy Defender, John M. McCarthy, Assistant Appellate Defender, Office of the State Appellate Defender, Fourth Judicial District, 400 West Monroe Street, Suite 303, P.O. Box 5240, Springfield, IL 62705-5240, Attorneys for Appellant.

Hon. Brendan F. Kelly, State's Attorney, St. Clair County Courthouse, 10 Public Square, Belleville, IL 62220; Patrick Delfino, Director, Thomas D. Arado, Deputy Director, Chelsea E. Kasten, Staff Attorney, Office of the State's Attorneys Appellate Prosecutor, 628 Columbus Street, Suite 300, Ottawa, IL 61350, Attorneys for Appellee.

JUSTICE MOOREdelivered the judgment of the court, with opinion.

¶ 1The defendant, David W. Ryder, appeals his convictions and sentences, in the circuit court of St. Clair County, for the offenses of predatory criminal sexual assault, victim under age 13 (count I and count II), and aggravated criminal sexual abuse, victim under age 13 (count III and count IV).For the following reasons, we affirm.

¶ 2 FACTS

¶ 3 The facts necessary to our disposition of this appeal follow.On September 5, 2014, the defendant was indicted by the grand jury of St. Clair County for the criminal offenses of predatory criminal sexual assault, victim under age 13 (count I and count II), and aggravated criminal sexual abuse, victim under age 13 (count III and count IV).Count I alleged that between June 1, 2014, and August 3, 2014, the defendant, who was born in 1972, "placed his penis inside the vagina of [a] female minor with a date of birth [in February 2002]."Count II alleged that during the same time frame, the defendant"placed his finger inside the vagina" of the same female victim.Count III alleged that between June 1, 2013, and August 31, 2013, the defendant"placed his penis in the hand of the [same female minor victim] for the purpose of the sexual gratification of the defendant."Count IV alleged that between June 1, 2014, and August 13, 2014, the defendant"placed his mouth on the vaginal area of the female minor for the purpose of the sexual gratification of the defendant."

¶ 4The defendant's jury trial commenced on November 17, 2015.Before allowing examination of the potential jurors by the parties, the trial judge conducted extensive voir dire himself.During the trial judge's questioning, he asked the potential jurors if any of them had "any close relatives employed by law enforcement?"Potential juror Harris indicated that he did, and additional questioning of him, by the trial judge, followed.Thereafter, the trial judge stated, "Anyone else?"Potential juror Pensoneau raised her hand and stated, "Yes, sir."When the trial judge asked her who she knew, the following colloquy occurred:

"JUROR PENSONEAU: Scott Weymouth.

THE COURT: And who is that?

JUROR PENSONEAU: He is a St. Clair County—I don't know actually his actual long title.

THE COURT: Is he an officer, a police officer?

JUROR PENSONEAU: He is crimes and detectives or something of that nature.Scott Weymouth.

THE COURT: Okay.

JUROR PENSONEAU: He's been there for—

THE COURT: Either of the parties know who we're referring to here?

MS. DALAN [ (ASSISTANT STATE'S ATTORNEY) ]: Yes, Your Honor.

JUROR PENSONEAU: He's my brother.

THE COURT: Is he in the Sheriff's Department?

MS. DALAN: Yes, sir, he is.

JUROR PENSONEAU: Do you know what his title is?

THE COURT: Okay.Anything about that relationship that would affect your ability—

JUROR PENSONEAU: Not at all—

THE COURT: —to serve?Okay.Anybody else?"

Additional potential jurors then discussed their relationships with law enforcement officers.The trial judge, at that time, did not dismiss any of the potential jurors based upon their answers.

¶ 5 Subsequently, when the trial judge had finished the rest of his extensive questioning, both the State and the defendant, separately, were permitted to question the potential jurors.Neither party followed up with Pensoneau about her relationship with her brother, Scott Weymouth.Outside the presence of the potential jurors, the parties then completed the jury selection process.Assistant State's Attorney (ASA) Dalan noted that "one of the jurors indicated that she knew Scott Weymouth," and that "[a]lthough he's not a witness in the case, he does appear in one of the video interviews."She added, "And I thought [defense counsel] probably already knew that and remembered it."Defense counsel then asked which juror "knew Weymouth?"ASA Dalan told him it was Pensoneau, who was in "seat number 19," and defense counsel responded, "Uh-huh.Got it.Okay."The selection process then continued.Neither party challenged Pensoneau for cause.When defense counsel used his final peremptory challenge against the potential juror in seat No. 18, ASA Dalan stated, "you know it's seven, don't you?Seven peremptories."Defense counsel responded, "Correct."Thereafter, the following colloquy occurred:

"[DEFENSE COUNSEL]: We're also going to excuse No. 19.

THE COURT: Wait a minute.You only got seven bullets, right?

MS. DALAN: Right.

THE COURT: So if you already got seven—

[DEFENSE COUNSEL]: Right.

THE COURT: Well, then you don't have any bullets left.

MS. LEAHY [ (ASSISTANT STATE'S ATTORNEY) ]: Is 19 * * * your seventh by your count or is 19 your—

[DEFENSE COUNSEL]: No, I take it back, Your Honor.We're not going to challenge 19."

Thereafter, defense counsel attempted to use a peremptory against the potential juror in seat No. 23, and was again reminded that he had used all seven of his peremptories.Both the juror in seat No. 19(Pensoneau), and the juror in seat No. 23, were seated on the jury.

¶ 6 The following morning, November 18, 2015, opening statements were given and testimony in the case began.The first witness to testify was Frank Bennett, an investigator with the St. Clair County Sheriff's Department.Bennett testified that after he learned of the victim's allegations against the defendant, Bennett facilitated an interview of the victim at the Child Advocacy Center in St. Clair County.After observing that interview, Bennett interviewed the defendant at the sheriff's department.The interview was audio and video recorded.After explaining the defendant's Miranda rights to the defendant, and going over a preprinted video statement checklist with the defendant, Bennett began to question the defendant, in an interview that lasted approximately one hour.Bennett testified that the defendant"originally denied everything, said that nothing happened."Bennett testified that eventually, the defendant stated that "he was in the mood for sex and his wife wasn't in the mood."The defendant saw the victim asleep with the defendant's daughter in the defendant's daughter's bedroom, and because the victim's "hand was off to the side,"the defendant"walked up and placed his penis in her hand and slid it back and forth a couple times."The jury was then permitted to watch the interview, which was authenticated by Bennett, admitted into evidence, and marked as "First Interview with Investigator Bennett."We have reviewed the interview, which is included as part of the record on appeal.We note that at approximately 23 minutes into the 49-minute interview (as explained above, the original interview was a little over one hour, but it was redacted to 49 minutes for trial, and it is the redacted version that is included in the record on appeal), Captain Weymouth entered the interview room, introduced himself to the defendant and shook the defendant's hand, and remained for the rest of the questioning, in which he participated.

¶ 7 On cross-examination, Bennett agreed that while interviewing the defendant, Bennett used investigative techniques he had been trained to use, and he reiterated that the defendant initially denied any inappropriate contact with the victim.He agreed that at one point the defendant told Bennett that the defendant was scared, and that Bennett told the defendant that the allegations were "not the crime of the century."Bennett agreed that during the interview he encouraged the defendant to take responsibility for the defendant's actions.On redirect examination, Bennett testified that based upon his many years as an investigator, he found it "common that suspects will initially deny conduct, criminal conduct, before admitting it."He agreed that the defendant denied wrongdoing many times during the interview, before admitting to "the conduct with the penis in the hand."He agreed that Captain Weymouth had asked the defendant if the defendant"had been a victim himself as a younger man," which the defendant denied.

¶ 8 The next witness to testify was Thomas Trice, who testified that he had recently retired from the St. Clair County Sheriff's Department after 21.5 years.Trice testified that following Bennett's initial interview with the defendant, Trice conducted a second interview the next day, which also was audio and video recorded.Prior to the interview, the defendant executed a second waiver of his Miranda rights.Trice testified that during his interview with the defendant, the defendant"explained" to Trice that the defendant inserted one of his fingers into the victim's vagina, "and that he actually used spit to lubricate her vagina, and that he also took his penis and placed it on her hand."He testified that the defendant denied that he licked the victim's vagina but admitted "[t]hat he placed his mouth down there and that he actually spit on her...