People v. Williams

Decision Date15 May 1992
Docket Number1-88-1049,Nos. 1-88-1048,s. 1-88-1048
Citation593 N.E.2d 968,171 Ill.Dec. 148,228 Ill.App.3d 981
Parties, 171 Ill.Dec. 148 The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Angelo WILLIAMS and Oscar Clay, Defendants-Appellants.
CourtUnited States Appellate Court of Illinois

Jack O'Malley, State's Atty. (Renee Goldfarb, James E. Fitzgerald, Janet C. Mahoney, of counsel), Chicago, for the People.

Randolph N. Stone, Public Defender of Cook County (Mary C. Arundel, of counsel), Chicago, for defendant-appellant Angelo Williams.

Michael J. Pelletier, Deputy Defender, Office of State Appellate Defender (Debra R. Salinger, of counsel), Chicago, for defendant-appellant Oscar Clay. Justice GORDON delivered the opinion of the court:

A jury found defendants Angelo Williams and Oscar Clay guilty of murder, and concealment of homicidal death. The court then merged the convictions and sentenced each defendant to a term of 40 years' imprisonment.

On appeal, both defendants contend that gang-related testimony and argument was prejudicial error; that the State failed to prove them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt; that it was error to permit a blood-stained rug to go to the jury room; that they were denied effective assistance of counsel; that the trial court failed to adequately question the venire regarding the principle that a defendant need not testify; that numerous prosecutorial comments in closing argument were prejudicial; that the cumulative effect of the errors denied them their right to a fair trial; and that their sentences are excessive.

Defendant Clay alone also contends that the mittimus showing two counts of murder must be corrected and a new sentencing hearing held; that it was error to permit certain testimony at his sentencing hearing; and that the State improperly elicited and argued the prior consistent statements of an eyewitness.

At trial, Arthur Cole, a postman, testified for the State that while on his postal route on June 19, 1987, at 9 a.m., he discovered the body of the victim, Aaron Buckles, in an industrial area in Chicago.

David Betz, a Chicago police officer, responded to Cole's call and observed the victim's body, clothed in a blue baseball t-shirt, blue pants and white gym shoes.

The parties stipulated that Dr. Robert J. Stein, a forensic pathologist, would testify that on June 20, 1987, he examined the victim's body. The cause of death was a gunshot wound to the face. Deposits of gunpowder around the wound indicated the gun was fired at close range to the victim's face.

Mary Siwak, a Chicago police officer, testified for the State that she was a member of the department's gang crimes unit. Siwak stated that the Black Gangster Disciples were active in the Cabrini Green area. Buckles, a member of that gang, had been providing Siwak with information about gang activity for approximately six months prior to his murder.

Monica Moore testified for the State that on the afternoon of June 18, 1987, she visited a friend, Bridgette McCall, at Cabrini Green. After playing cards for awhile, they went downstairs to another apartment in that building, where McCall planned to buy marijuana. A woman answered the door. In the apartment living room, Moore saw Buckles, whom she knew casually. Buckles wore a blue shirt, blue pants and white gym shoes. Moore also saw both defendants. Moore had known Williams for four years, and she went to grammar school with Clay. A fourth man, whom Moore did not know, was also in the apartment.

Moore testified further that defendants, Buckles and the fourth man went into the back bedroom. At one point, Moore walked toward the bathroom, which was located across from the back bedroom. Moore heard defendant Clay twice call Buckles a "stool pigeon." Buckles denied the accusation. As Moore left the bathroom and passed the bedroom, she looked in and saw defendant Clay holding a shotgun, and defendant Williams pointing a handgun at Buckles. Moore watched as Clay said that "Aaron's ass was out," held the gun up to Buckles' face, and fired the shotgun. Moore ran to the front of the apartment. As she and McCall tried to leave, Clay and the fourth man came into the room and said the women could not leave.

Moore testified further that shortly thereafter, defendants carried the victim's body out of the bedroom, wrapped in a blanket. Clay told Moore and McCall that if they did not cooperate, he would do the same thing to them that he had done to Buckles. With the women accompanying them, defendants carried the victim's body to a black 4-door car parked outside the building. Moore had previously seen defendant Williams' brother, James Williams Thaddeus Melko, a Chicago police department evidence technician, testified that on October 15, 1987, he searched a 1975 black 4-door car. He removed pieces of carpeting from the trunk and gave them to the serology unit.

[171 Ill.Dec. 153] driving the car. Defendants put the body in the trunk. The fourth man drove defendants and the women to an industrial area where defendants removed the victim's body from the trunk and left it on the ground. They drove back to Cabrini Green, where Clay threatened to kill Moore and her child if she said anything. Moore reported nothing to the police until October 1987, when they came to her apartment and asked her what had happened to Buckles. She had not previously reported the crime to the police because she was "afraid they was [sic] going to do me like they did Aaron Buckles."

Christine Braun, a serologist with the police department testified that she tested the pieces of carpet and found traces of human blood. Due to the condition of the carpet it was not possible to determine the blood type.

Thomas Ward, a Chicago police officer, testified that he knew both defendants were members of the Black Gangster Disciples gang. He was also aware that Buckles had been a police informant. Ward had been assigned to Cabrini Green for four years and his unit was particularly concerned with gang activities in the area. Ward had made over 300 gang-related arrests in the Cabrini Green area. He was familiar with the Black Gangster Disciples street gang.

Ward testified further that in the hierarchical structure of the Black Gangster Disciples, defendant Clay had the position of "enforcer." Defendant Clay had tattoos of symbols commonly used by that street gang. Within the gang, defendant Williams had the position of a "general." Defendant Williams also had a tattoo of a common Disciples symbol, and a tattoo of the letters "BGD." Ward testified that he knew defendants were currently members of the gang because of the tattoos, defendants' own admissions made to Ward, and information given to Ward by informants.

Ward testified further that the police department kept "gang cards" on all known gang members, and had cards on defendants. Williams' card was made out by Ward on August 7, 1987. Clay's car was made out by Ward on November 28, 1984. The cards included the information regarding defendants' gang tattoos.

Defendants offered no witnesses.

The jury found defendants guilty of murder and concealment of a homicidal death.

OPINION
I. Gang-related Evidence

Both defendants contend that the trial court erred in admitting evidence of gang membership and gang activity.

Evidence of gang membership and activity is admissible where there is sufficient proof that such evidence is related to the crime charged. (People v. Hairston (1970), 46 Ill.2d 348, 372, 263 N.E.2d 840; People v. Anderson (1987), 153 Ill.App.3d 542, 549, 106 Ill.Dec. 512, 505 N.E.2d 1303.) Evidence of gang membership may be used to show motive for the commission of the offense, thus tending to identify a particular person as the offender. People v. Rivera (1986), 145 Ill.App.3d 609, 99 Ill.Dec. 353, 495 N.E.2d 1088; People v. Orr (1986), 149 Ill.App.3d 348, 102 Ill.Dec. 772, 500 N.E.2d 665.

Initially, defense counsel made a pretrial motion in limine to exclude gang-related testimony. The court first permitted an examination of defendants' bodies for gang insignia. The court later denied the motion in limine, noting the significance of Officer Siwak's testimony that the victim was a police informant on gang activity. "[T]hat is the tie-in, that he was in fact what * * * the defendant Williams accused him of being * * *."

Recently, our supreme court addressed the issue of admitting gang-related evidence in People v. Gonzalez (1991), 142 Ill.2d 481, 154 Ill.Dec. 643, 568 N.E.2d 864. The court recited the general rule that gang-related evidence is admissible if it is relevant to an issue in dispute and its probative value is not substantially out-weighed by its prejudicial effect. (People v. Gonzalez, 142 Ill.2d at 487, 154 Ill.Dec. 643, 568 N.E.2d 864.) "Relevant evidence is defined as evidence having any tendency to make the existence of a fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more or less probable than it would be without the evidence." People v. Gonzalez, 142 Ill.2d at 487-88, 154 Ill.Dec. 643, 568 N.E.2d 864.

In Gonzalez, the court found the trial court did not err in weighing the probative value and prejudicial effect of the gang-related evidence. That evidence was relevant to the extent that it strengthened the victim's identification, since the victim told the police he believed his assailant was a member of a certain gang. The evidence was also relevant to the investigative steps taken by the police prior to defendant's arrest, since the police gave the victim a book containing photographs of Spanish Cobra gang members. People v. Gonzalez, 142 Ill.2d at 487-88, 154 Ill.Dec. 643, 568 N.E.2d 864.

In the present case the gang-related evidence was relevant to the extent that it explained defendants' motive for committing the murder. Moore testified that she heard defendant Clay call Buckles a "stool pigeon," and heard Clay say that "Aaron's ass was out." The accusation of ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
22 cases
  • People v. Ammons
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • 16 de setembro de 2021
    ...(1996) ; People v. Lovelace , 251 Ill. App. 3d 607, 624, 190 Ill.Dec. 829, 622 N.E.2d 859 (1993) ; People v. Williams , 228 Ill. App. 3d 981, 997-1007, 171 Ill.Dec. 148, 593 N.E.2d 968 (1992).¶ 54 In arguing that the prosecutor's comments about the police constituted reversible error, the d......
  • People v. Blue
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • 27 de janeiro de 2000
    ...1254 (1993); People v. Rivera, 235 Ill.App.3d 536, 540-41, 176 Ill.Dec. 759, 602 N.E.2d 66 (1992); People v. Williams, 228 Ill. App.3d 981, 1002, 171 Ill.Dec. 148, 593 N.E.2d 968 (1992); People v. Threadgill, 166 Ill.App.3d 643, 648-51, 117 Ill.Dec. 96, 520 N.E.2d 86 (1988); People v. Plair......
  • People v. Sutton
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • 30 de março de 1994
    ...show or even allege that the verdict would have been different absent the prosecutor's remarks. See People v. Williams (1992), 228 Ill.App.3d 981, 1005, 171 Ill.Dec. 148, 593 N.E.2d 968. Defendant's final argument challenges the trial court's admission of Officer Strain's preliminary hearin......
  • People v. Wilson
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • 24 de novembro de 1993
    ...life sentence on defendant even though his brother was the shooter. People v. Fauntleroy; see also People v. Williams (1992), 228 Ill.App.3d 981, 171 Ill.Dec. 148, 593 N.E.2d 968. For the foregoing reasons the judgment of the circuit court is JUDGMENT AFFIRMED. MURRAY and MCNULTY, JJ., conc......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT