People v. Warren

• Decision Date: 30 June 2016
• Docket Number: No. 1–09–0884.,1–09–0884.
• Citation: 405 Ill.Dec. 453,58 N.E.3d 714
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. Laron WARREN, Defendant–Appellant.
• Court: United States Appellate Court of Illinois

58 N.E.3d 714

405 Ill.Dec. 453

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

v.Laron WARREN, Defendant–Appellant.

No. 1–09–0884.

Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, Fourth Division.

June 30, 2016.

Michael J. Pelletier, Patricia Unsinn, Alan D. Goldberg, Geoffrey Brukhart, all of State Appellate Defender's Office, of Chicago, for appellant.

Anita M. Alvarez, State's Attorney, Chicago (Alan J. Spellberg, Michele Grimaldi Stein, and Celeste Stewart Stack, Assistant State's Attorneys, of counsel), for the People.

OPINION

Justice ELLIS delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion.

¶ 1 In 1997, defendant Laron Warren was convicted of the murder of Ebony Higgins. At defendant's bench trial, the State's witnesses identified him as the man who shot Higgins from the front passenger-side window of a car. Defendant presented evidence that a man named Willie Madlock shot Higgins.

¶ 2 At the time of the offense, defendant was 17 years old. Because defendant had previously been convicted of murder, the trial court was required to sentence defendant to incarceration for the rest of his natural life. 730 ILCS 5/5–8–1(a)(1)(c)(i) (West 1994).

¶ 3 In 1999, defendant filed a postconviction petition with the assistance of counsel. The petition alleged, among other things, that defendant was actually innocent. But defendant's counsel did not attach affidavits or other evidence to support that argument. Counsel told the court that, while he knew of potential witnesses who could potentially substantiate this claim, he did not secure signatures from them in order to prepare affidavits. The trial court dismissed the petition in part for a lack of evidentiary support, and we affirmed the trial court's judgment. People v. Warren, No. 1–04–2380, 365 Ill.App.3d 1105, 339 Ill.Dec. 794, 927 N.E.2d 335 (2006) (unpublished order under Supreme Court Rule 23 ).

¶ 4 In 2009, defendant sought leave to file a second postconviction petition, which again raised his claim of actual innocence. This time, defendant attached four affidavits —some of which appeared to have been drafted around the time of his first postconviction petition but were not signed or notarized until years later—to support his assertion that Madlock was guilty of Higgins's murder. The trial court found that defendant failed to state a claim of actual innocence because the affidavits did not constitute newly discovered evidence.

¶ 5 This court first affirmed the trial court's judgment in 2011. People v. Warren, 2011 IL App (1st) 090884–U. In a supervisory order, the Illinois Supreme Court directed us to vacate that decision and to reconsider it in light of People v. Edwards, 2012 IL 111711, ¶¶ 20–29, 360 Ill.Dec. 784, 969 N.E.2d 829, which clarified the standards applicable to actual-innocence claims raised in successive postconviction petitions. People v. Warren, 359 Ill.Dec. 778, 967 N.E.2d 808 (2012). In 2013, we again affirmed the dismissal of defendant's successive petition because defendant had not supported his petition with newly discovered evidence. People v. Warren, 2013 IL App (2d) 090884–U, 2013 WL 6452284. Justice Gordon dissented from that decision. Id. ¶¶ 63–77 (Gordon, J., dissenting).

¶ 6 On January 28, 2015, the Illinois Supreme Court issued another supervisory order, directing us to vacate our 2013 order and to reconsider our judgment in light of People v. Davis, 2014 IL 115595, 379 Ill.Dec. 381, 6 N.E.3d 709. People v. Warren, 389 Ill.Dec. 13, 25 N.E.3d 658 (2015). In Davis, the Illinois Supreme Court held that the United States Supreme Court's decision in Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. ––––, ––––, 132 S.Ct. 2455, 2469, 183 L.Ed.2d 407 (2012), which held that mandatory sentences of natural life without parole for defendants under the age of 18 violate the eighth amendment of the United States Constitution, applied retroactively. Davis, 2014 IL 115595, ¶¶ 36–40, 379 Ill.Dec. 381, 6 N.E.3d 709.

¶ 7 Pursuant to the Illinois Supreme Court's supervisory order, in a previous order we vacated our prior judgment in Warren, 2013 IL App (2d) 090884–U, and this opinion will now stand as our disposition of this matter. For the reasons stated below, we now vacate defendant's mandatory life-without-parole sentence, which was imposed on defendant for conduct he committed when he was 17 years old, and remand for resentencing. We also reverse the trial court's order denying defendant leave to file his successive postconviction petition because defendant established a colorable claim of actual innocence justifying further proceedings on his successive petition.

¶ 8 I. BACKGROUND

¶ 9 A. Trial and Direct Appeal

¶ 10 As we have discussed the evidence adduced at trial at length in our prior order regarding defendant's direct appeal (People v. Warren, No. 1–97–4010, 303 Ill.App.3d 1103, 254 Ill.Dec. 695, 747 N.E.2d 1107 (1999) (unpublished order under Supreme Court Rule 23 )), we will not reiterate those facts at length. We discuss the trial evidence to the extent necessary to resolve this appeal.

¶ 11 On the afternoon of April 3, 1994, Ebony Higgins, Michael Stampley, Demario Jackson, Jutoy Hoskins, Kevin Smith, and Ebony's boyfriend, Omar Muhammad, were walking along the sidewalk on 107th Street in Chicago, heading to Muhammad's house. As the group walked, Stampley and Jackson were the closest to the street, just behind Higgins. A car hit the curb behind them, and Jackson and Stampley turned around. They saw two people in the front seats of a blue, four-door Buick. The passenger, whom both Jackson and Stampley identified as defendant, stuck his arm and part of his head out of the car window and began shooting.

¶ 12 After the shooting, Jackson told the police that the shooter was a 20–year–old African–American male with a light complexion and “corn” braids in his hair. Stampley said that the man was clean shaven and had a chubby face.

¶ 13 Muhammad also testified, but he did not see the car or its occupants because he did not turn around after he heard tires screeching behind him. He testified that he heard four gunshots and tried to push Higgins away from the street, but she was struck after Muhammad heard two more gunshots.

¶ 14 On April 7, 1994, Jackson and Stampley saw the Buick again, traveling south on 106th Street. They took down the license plate number and gave it to the police.

¶ 15 On April 9, 1994, the police found the Buick abandoned on the side of the highway. It had been severely damaged in an accident. The police processed the car and found fingerprints on the passenger side of the interior rear-view mirror; the rear, passenger-side window; and the rear, driver-side quarter panel. Ten of those prints were submitted for latent fingerprint examination. According to latent print examiner Richard McGrath, a print found on the rear, passenger-side window matched defendant's left thumb print.

¶ 16 After defendant's arrest, the police arranged for him to be included in a lineup. Stampley and Jackson separately viewed the lineup eight days after the shooting and immediately identified defendant as the shooter. Jackson conceded that defendant's complexion at trial was darker than it appeared in the lineup. Jackson also conceded that defendant did not look heavyset in the lineup. Stampley testified that, in the lineup, defendant had facial hair and that his face looked “kind of wide” or “filled in,” not fat.

¶ 17 Defendant presented evidence that he was not present for the shooting, and that a man named Willie Madlock killed Higgins. Dejuan Jones testified that, on April 3, 1994, he was in the rear, driver-side seat of the blue Buick traveling on 107th Street. According to Jones, defendant was not in the car. Germaine Bledsoe was driving, Madlock was in the front passenger seat, and a man named Clay was in the rear, passenger-side seat. Jones heard Madlock yell, “There go [sic ] Herman.” Bledsoe then drove the car up onto the curb and Madlock began to shoot at a group of eight or nine people with a revolver. Jones ducked down in the car, so he did not see whether Madlock shot anyone. After Madlock fired four or five shots, Bledsoe sped away. Jones admitted that he had not disclosed this information to the police before trial. At the time of trial, Jones, who was incarcerated for murder, had been defendant's friend for 10 years.

¶ 18 Sylvia Stewart, defendant's aunt, testified that defendant attended a party she hosted on April 3, 1994. Sylvia testified that her son picked defendant up and brought him to the party between 9:30 and 10 a.m. Between 2 and 2:30 p.m., defendant and Sylvia left to pick up defendant's girlfriend and three friends, then returned. Sylvia testified that defendant did not leave the party again until 10:30 p.m.

¶ 19 On cross-examination, Sylvia denied telling an investigator that she could not speak with him because she needed time to get her “story straight.” She conceded that she knew defendant had been arrested soon after April 3, 1994, and that she never told the police that defendant had been at her home during the shooting. During the State's rebuttal, the parties stipulated that an investigator would testify that Sylvia had refused to speak with him, saying that she needed time to get her story straight.

¶ 20 Lavelle Stewart, defendant's cousin and Sylvia's son, also testified that defendant was at the party on April 3, 1994. Like Sylvia, Lavelle said that he picked defendant up and brought him to the party around 10:30 a.m. Lavelle also testified that Sylvia and defendant left around 12:30 p.m. to pick up defendant and three friends. After returning, defendant remained at the party until 11 or 11:30 p.m.

¶ 21 On cross-examination, Lavelle testified that defendant and his girlfriend went upstairs around 6 or 7 p.m. and did not come back down until he left. He also testified that he heard defendant had been charged with murder just two days after the party, but Lavelle did not tell the police that defendant was with him on April 3, 1994.

¶ 22 The...