People v. Thomas
| Decision Date | 23 November 2022 |
| Docket Number | 4-21-0538 |
| Citation | 2022 IL App (4th) 210538 U |
| Parties | THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. TERRANCE K. THOMAS, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | United 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 the Circuit Court of Macon County No. 19CF1746 Honorable Jeffrey S. Geisler, Judge Presiding.
ORDER
DeARMOND JUSTICE.
¶ 1 Held: The appellate court affirmed, holding the State proved defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt defendant's claims of improperly admitted evidence are unfounded, defendant did not receive ineffective assistance of counsel, and defendant received a fair trial.
¶ 2 In a July 2021 trial, a jury found defendant, Terrance K Thomas, guilty of unlawful possession of methamphetamine with intent to deliver (720 ILCS 646/55(a)(1), (a)(2)(D) (West 2018)), a Class X felony. Defendant afterwards filed a posttrial motion, arguing the trial court erred in denying his directed-verdict motion because the State's evidence was insufficient to prove him guilty. In an August 2021 hearing, the trial court denied defendant's motion and sentenced him to 12 years in the Illinois Department of Corrections (DOC), followed by 18 months' mandatory supervised release (MSR).
¶ 3 On appeal, defendant challenges his conviction on four grounds: (1) the State failed to prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt; (2) the trial court erred in admitting inadmissible hearsay evidence, namely cellphone records, testimony, and text messages; (3) trial counsel's various failures to object to inadmissible hearsay evidence or call certain witnesses, his failure to file a pretrial suppression motion, and his decision to stipulate to a laboratory report amounted to ineffective assistance; and (4) the cumulative prejudicial effect from the trial court's errors in admitting evidence rendered the trial unfair. We disagree and affirm the convictions.
¶ 5 In November 2019, by way of information, the State charged defendant with one count of unlawful possession of methamphetamine with intent to deliver (720 ILCS 646/55(a)(1), (a)(2)(D) (West 2018)), alleging on June 11 2019, "defendant knowingly and unlawfully possessed with intent to deliver 100 grams or more but less than 400 grams of a substance containing methamphetamine, other than as authorized in the Methamphetamine Control and Community Protection Act." The State charged a second count but dismissed it before trial. The matter proceeded to a jury trial on July 13, 2019.
¶ 6 The State first called Tashia Cunningham, who testified she was arrested by the Macon County Sheriff's Office on June 11, 2019. As she sat in a stationhouse interrogation room, she offered "to mak[e] a phone call" and "obtain some pills from someone" as a way of "helping" police and potentially helping herself. She called a saved contact in her phone, identified only as "Streetz," and arranged to buy "three or four jars" of" [p]ills, Ex. [sic] pills." She explained that a jar would contain 100 pills. Cunningham told Streetz to meet her at her house for the transaction and she did not need to give him her address. Later, the two arranged the time for the exchange via text message. Cunningham testified she recognized the voice on the phone as the person she knew as "Streetz" because she had called him before to buy pills. She had also met Streetz in person. In court, Cunningham identified defendant as the person she knew as "Streetz."
¶ 7 Cunningham testified to her lengthy criminal history, which included multiple driving and drug offenses. Although she noted she had received no promises from the State on her pending charges, Cunningham stated she hoped to receive some consideration or even benefit from arranging the drug buy with Streetz and then testifying at the trial.
¶ 8 Through her testimony, the State introduced photographs of Cunningham's phone. She identified the phone in the pictures as her phone and the Streetz contact (phone number 217-775-****) as the number she called to set up the drug buy on June 11, 2019. Cunningham further identified two pictures of her phone displaying her text exchanges with Streetz on June 11.
¶ 9 On cross-examination, defense counsel questioned Cunningham further about her criminal history and confirmed she also had been convicted of forgery in 2019. Cunningham noted she was arrested on June 11, 2019, on heroin charges. She explained she made the offer to help police by setting up a drug buy within 10 or 15 minutes of arriving at the police station. Cunningham testified she did not know Streetz's real name on June 11 and only learned Streetz's name was Terrance Thomas when she received her subpoena to testify. Counsel inquired if police showed Cunningham any pictures on June 11 to identify Streetz. She said she was shown one photo, a picture of defendant, whom she identified as Streetz.
¶ 10 The State next called Detective Jonathan Roseman of the Macon County Sheriff's Office. He explained he worked in the street crimes unit affiliated with the Decatur Police Department. Roseman recounted arresting Cunningham on heroin charges on June 11, 2019. Roseman testified Cunningham "indicated that she wished to cooperate with law enforcement on behalf of getting consideration on her pending charge," and she provided him the name "Streetz." Roseman noted he was familiar with that name and knew Streetz to be defendant. He testified he saw Streetz in the courtroom and pointed to defendant.
¶ 11 Roseman explained he used Cunningham to set up a drug transaction with defendant at the place she normally met defendant-her home. When the State asked Roseman if Cunningham provided him any helpful information about a vehicle defendant may drive to the transaction, defense counsel objected on hearsay grounds. The State argued it was not asking what information Cunningham provided but if she provided information. The trial court overruled the objection and allowed Roseman to answer. He stated Cunningham provided him information. Roseman testified he sent unmarked officers and detectives to "establish surveillance" at Cunningham's home. He informed law enforcement to look out for a red Chevy pick-up truck or a silver four-door sedan. He stated Detective Travis Wolfe was supposed to make initial contact with defendant when he arrived. When asked what happened when officers approached defendant, defense counsel again objected, arguing Roseman "wasn't present *** so this would be hearsay." The trial court overruled the objection. Roseman explained he did not go to Cunningham's home to intercept the drug buy or apprehend defendant, but he monitored the operation in real time via radio traffic and he later reviewed the in-car video.
¶ 12 Roseman testified he observed a silver four-door Pontiac Grand Prix. As officers approached the vehicle, it "took off and initiated a vehicle pursuit, and it ultimately was able to evade detective Wolfe and Hunt after discarding some suspected narcotics." Roseman testified the silver Grand Prix was registered to defendant. He noted a Decatur police officer later found and seized the vehicle, which had been abandoned. Roseman testified officers found four bags of pills, three that had been discarded from the silver Grand Prix and one remaining within the vehicle, which later field tested to be methamphetamine. When presented with four exhibits, Roseman identified them as pictures of "the pills and the drug packaging that was associated with the bags that were discarded outside of the vehicle during the pursuit and there was one that was also inside of the vehicle after it was located." Roseman explained why he removed the pills from the packaging: (1) to preserve latent fingerprints on the bags, (2) to field test the substances, and (3) to "see the approximate number of pills that were present *** to make sure that the amount that we recovered was consistent with the amount that we had ordered so we didn't have any outstanding bags of narcotics."
¶ 13 The State then presented Roseman with three photographs. He identified them as photos of Cunningham's phone and the text messages between her and Streetz. He testified the photographs were fair and accurate representations of the phone. He explained he took the photos in order "to document the date and the timeline of when the transaction was set up as to when it actually occurred" and "to document the phone number that was being utilized by 'Streetz' and just to document that we had set up a narcotics transaction."
¶ 14 Roseman testified police made no arrests related to the attempted drug buy on June 11, 2019. He noted defendant called the department regarding his impounded vehicle and asked to retrieve items from the car. Roseman spoke with defendant both on the phone and in-person on June 19, 2019. Defendant said his phone number was 217-519-**** and had been for "a significant period of time." Defendant denied any involvement in a June 11 drug buy, saying he was in Chicago on that date and had his phone with him the whole time. After speaking with defendant, Roseman ran the two phone numbers associated with defendant through the jail phone system to determine if anyone in jail communicated with the numbers. Roseman testified he found one communication with 217-775-****-the same number Cunningham called to set up the drug buy with Streetz. Roseman noted Adrian Barbee phoned the number and spoke with a male. During the conversation, the male indicated he had just had a baby. Roseman was not "100 percent certain if...
To continue reading
Request your trial