People v. Willis

• Decision Date: 30 September 2013
• Docket Number: Docket No. 1–11–0233.
• Citation: 375 Ill.Dec. 636,2013 IL App (1st) 110233,997 N.E.2d 947
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. Arsenio WILLIS, Defendant–Appellant.
• Court: United States Appellate Court of Illinois

2013 IL App (1st) 110233
997 N.E.2d 947
375 Ill.Dec. 636

The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff–Appellee,
v.
Arsenio WILLIS, Defendant–Appellant.

Docket No. 1–11–0233.

Appellate Court of Illinois,
First District, Third Division.

Sept. 30, 2013.

[997 N.E.2d 951]

Michael J. Pelletier, Alan D. Goldberg, and Darrel F. Oman, all of State Appellate Defender's Office, of Chicago, for appellant.

Anita M. Alvarez, State's Attorney, of Chicago (Alan J. Spellberg and Peter Maltese, Assistant State's Attorneys, of counsel), for the People.

Presiding Justice HYMAN delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion.
OPINION

¶ 1 Sixteen years old at the time the crime was committed, defendant Arsenio Willis was tried as an adult as required

[997 N.E.2d 952]

under the Illinois Juvenile Court Act of 1987 (705 ILCS 405/5–130 (West 2010)). Section 5–130 of that Act mandates automatic transfer to criminal court of 15– and 16–year–olds charged with certain Class X felonies. A jury found Arsenio guilty of first degree murder with a firearm and aggravated battery with a firearm (accountability). The trial court sentenced him to 63 years in the adult prison system. A crucial issue in this appeal is the constitutionality of section 5–130 of the Juvenile Court Act (705 ILCS 405/5–130 (West 2010)), particularly following three recent United States Supreme Court cases recognizing the fundamental differences between juvenile offenders and adults.

¶ 2 Arsenio also argues:

(i) the State failed to prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt;

(ii) the State's closing argument prejudiced him by misrepresenting the level of proof required to find him accountable, disparaging his counsel, and misrepresenting the evidence;

(iii) his 63–year sentence is unconstitutionally excessive and disproportionate to his codefendant's 53–year sentence; and

(iv) the trial court failed to make a Krankel inquiry ( People v. Krankel, 102 Ill.2d 181 [80 Ill.Dec. 62, 464 N.E.2d 1045] (1984)) into his counsel's allegation of his own ineffectiveness.

¶ 3 Although we find the precedent regarding the constitutionality of the Juvenile Court Act's automatic transfer troubling, we choose to follow it at this time because the recent United States Supreme Court cases on which Arsenio relies do not convince us otherwise. In addition, we affirm Arsenio's convictions for first degree murder and aggravated battery with a firearm (accountability). The evidence, when viewed most favorably to the prosecution, supports a finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt on both of Arsenio's convictions. Two eyewitnesses identified Arsenio and his codefendant as the only individuals with guns and as firing the guns at the time the victims were shot.

¶ 4 As to the State's closing arguments, we find the State adequately confined its arguments to the evidence and the reasonable inferences to be drawn from that evidence. Nor did the State misrepresent the burden of proof or the evidence and did not disparage Arsenio's counsel. And, based on the trial court's comments during sentencing, we uphold Arsenio's sentences as a proper exercise of the sentencing court's discretion.

¶ 5 Finally, following a thorough review of the record, we hold the trial court failed to conduct a preliminary inquiry into the factual basis of Arsenio's posttrial claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel as required by Krankel. The trial court should have engaged in a discussion with Arsenio or, considering Arsenio's age, his defense counsel concerning the defense counsel's claim and later, the spontaneous withdrawal of that claim. We remand for a Krankel hearing.

¶ 6 Background

¶ 7 Defendant Arsenio Willis and codefendant David Hill, both 16–year–olds, were charged with four counts of the first degree murder of Romaz Lucas and one count of attempted first degree murder of Charles Barrows. Arsenio and Hill were tried in simultaneous jury trials. Arsenio was found guilty of first degree murder with a firearm and aggravated battery with a firearm. He was sentenced to consecutive terms of 33 years for the first degree murder conviction, with 15 years for statutory firearm enhancement, and 15 years for aggravated battery with a firearm conviction.

¶ 8 A cousin of Romaz Lucas', Romeo McCollum, testified that on the morning of May 16, 2008, he, Lucas, and Charles Barrows

[997 N.E.2d 953]

went to McCollum's grandmother's house at 5347 West Race where, along with others, they played dice on the patio in the backyard. Around 3 p.m., Arsenio, Hill, and Demario Williams arrived. Lucas asked Williams for the $100 that he claimed Williams owed him. Hill stepped in and told Lucas that he “wasn't getting nothing.” McCollum, facing Hill, saw Hill pull out a gun. Lucas told Hill to put the gun down and, “Let's fight like men.” McCollum testified that Hill's gun was nearly parallel to the ground and pointed at Lucas at the time of Hill's first shot. Lucas tried to wrestle the gun away from Hill, when another shot went off, but McCollum could not tell who fired it.

¶ 9 McCollum testified that Arsenio had been sitting on the stairs by the gate when the fight began. McCollum saw Arsenio fire his gun at Lucas while Lucas lay on the ground, and Arsenio fired more than once. On hearing gunshots, the occupants of the backyard scattered in all directions. As McCollum tried to help the mortally wounded Lucas, he saw Hill running away along with Arsenio.

¶ 10 McCollum testified he saw no one with a weapon other than Hill and Arsenio. He could not recall if more shots were fired after he ran to Lucas. But, when confronted with his grand jury testimony, he acknowledged he may have told the grand jury that while leaning over Lucas, he heard a few more shots come from the same area as the original shots. The day after the shooting, McCollum identified Arsenio and Hill in separate photo arrays as “the guys that shot [his] cousin.”

¶ 11 Charles Barrows testified that he was playing dice in the backyard, and although he was not paying attention to the conversations, recalled hearing something said about Williams owing Lucas money. Burrows testified Hill interjected himself into the conversation before pulling a gun from his pocket, precipitating a fight between Hill and Lucas, with Lucas struggling to get the gun out of Hill's hand. The gun fired while pointed toward Lucas's legs. Everyone scattered, said Barrows, and additional gunshots went off. Burrows saw Arsenio “shooting in the yard,” and believed Arsenio was trying to help his friend Hill get away. As Hill ran, Burrows saw Arsenio shooting at the people still there. He heard three gunshots.

¶ 12 Burrows testified that Arsenio fired the shot that hit the side of his body. Burrows ran out to the alley before collapsing and could not recall whether Arsenio stuck around or not. Burrows testified the only guns he saw in the backyard belonged to Arsenio and Hill. Burrows knew Arsenio had shot him because only Arsenio was shooting in the backyard at the time.

¶ 13 Detectives interviewed Burrows at the hospital, where his injuries required a month-long stay. From a photo array, Burrows identified Arsenio as the individual who shot him and Hill as the individual who first displayed a gun and fought with Lucas. In a lineup on June 15, 2008, Burrows identified Arsenio as the individual “shooting in the yard,” and who shot him, and identified Hill as the individual who was “upping the gun.”

¶ 14 Demario Williams testified that on May 16, 2008, while on his way home with his friend, Arsenio, they came across Hill who told Williams about the dice game. When he arrived at the dice game, Williams was wearing headphones, and he testified he did not initially hear what Lucas said to him. Williams recalled removing the headphones, and telling Lucas that he did not have the money to pay him back, but would pay when he did. At this time, Arsenio was sitting by the stairs leading to the back porch. Williams put his headphones back on, and as he was about to leave, saw Lucas approach Hill,

[997 N.E.2d 954]

and the two engage in a conversation. Hill had his hands in his pockets.

¶ 15 Williams saw Hill pull a gun from his right pocket as Lucas was “coming towards” him. Williams testified that before seeing the gun in Hill's hand, he did not know Hill had a gun. He said Hill raised his arm at a 30–degree angle, but did not point the gun at anyone. The last thing Williams heard before leaving the backyard was Lucas saying, “What do you need a gun for? We can fight.” Williams said he heard nothing else due to the headphones. The last thing he saw before leaving the backyard was Lucas reaching for Hill's gun. Williams heard only one shot. He did not see Hill shoot Lucas or see Arsenio with a gun.

¶ 16 On the sound of a single gunshot, Williams ran toward his mother in the front yard, and at her request, went inside the house. The next day Williams identified Hill from a photo array.

¶ 17 Demario Williams's mother, Sheila Williams, testified that she lived with her four sons at the house. At 3 p.m., she was on her front porch with her sister, brother, some of her children, and neighbors when her son, Demario Williams, arrived with Arsenio and Hill. She told them about the dice game in the backyard. The front porch is about 15 feet from the alley where the backyard gate is located. About five or six minutes later, she heard a single gunshot come from the backyard and went into the alley on the side of the house toward the side gate to see what happened. There, she saw Demario, wearing his headphones, running toward her. She told her son to go inside the house.

¶ 18 She saw Arsenio fall from her fence and, as he did, he turned his head and made eye contact with her. She testified the butt of the gun was in his right hand, which was elevated and moving. When she saw Arsenio fall, she did not hear a gunshot. She turned and went back toward her house, and that is when she saw someone, whom she could not identify, run...