The People Of The State Of Ill. v. Johnson

Decision Date15 April 2010
Docket NumberNo. 107975.,107975.
PartiesThe PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Appellee,v.Raymond JOHNSON, Appellant.
CourtIllinois Supreme Court

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

Michael J. Pelletier, State Appellate Defender, Robert Agostinelli, Deputy Defender, and Melissa A. Maye, Assistant Appellate Defender, of the Office of the State Appellate Defender, of Ottawa, for appellant, and Raymond Johnson, of Canton, appellant pro se.

Lisa Madigan, Attorney General, of springfield, and Kevin Lyons, States's Attorney, of Peoria (Michael A. Scodro, Solicitor General, and Michael M. Glick and David H. Iskowich, Assistant Attorneys General, of Chicago, of counsel), for the People.

OPINION

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

Following a stipulated bench trial in the circuit court of Peoria County, defendant was found guilty of aggravated battery with a firearm (720 ILCS 5/12-4.2(a)(1) (West 2006)), aggravated unlawful use of a weapon (720 ILCS 5/24-1.6(a)(1) (West 2006)), and unlawful possession of a weapon by a felon (720 ILCS 5/24-1.1(a) (West 2006)) and sentenced to 12 years' imprisonment. The appellate court vacated the conviction for unlawful possession of a weapon by a felon, affirmed the judgment in all other respects, and remanded the cause with instructions to amend the sentencing order. 387 Ill.App.3d 780, 327 Ill.Dec. 127, 901 N.E.2d 455. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm.

BACKGROUND

Defendant was arrested July 9, 2006, in connection with the shooting of Calvin Powell. Before trial, defendant filed a motion to quash arrest and suppress evidence discovered during a police search of a vehicle owned by Lawrence Thomas. The circuit court heard evidence on the motion from two police officers, Officer Chris Hanley and Lieutenant Jeff Adams. Officer Hanley testified that at approximately 3 a.m. on July 9, he was with Illinois State Police officers at an accident scene when police dispatchers notified him that there had been a shooting approximately six blocks away. Officer Hanley immediately drove toward the reported location. As he approached, he saw defendant and Thomas get into a white Ford Explorer, later identified as Thomas's, that had been parked in the parking lot of the Friendship House, a closed business. According to Officer Hanley, the Friendship House parking lot is just across an alley from the location of the reported shooting. Officer Hanley followed the men out of the Friendship House parking lot in his marked squad car, but he did not activate his lights or siren.

Thomas drove a few blocks to the nearby Taft Homes, where he parked the Explorer, and defendant and Thomas got out of the car and began to walk away. Officer Hanley pulled into the lot and parked approximately 50 to 75 feet away from the Explorer, shining his spotlight on the two men as he approached. They stopped, and Officer Hanley asked them several questions about where they were coming from and whether they knew anything about the reported shooting. According to Officer Hanley, the men were cooperative but vague, and they seemed nervous. He asked them for identification, which they provided, and he ran a warrant check, which revealed no outstanding warrants. Officer Hanley then asked for consent to search the men, and they agreed. When he found nothing, he asked Thomas for consent to search the Explorer. Thomas refused, but Officer Hanley's supervisor, Lieutenant Adams, who had arrived a few minutes after Officer Hanley, directed Officer Hanley to search the Explorer anyway. The officers did not have a warrant. Thomas and defendant were handcuffed and put into the back of a squad car while officers searched the Explorer. Under the front passenger seat, officers found a .22-caliber handgun. Defendant was arrested, and he later admitted that he had used the handgun to shoot at the victim.

Lieutenant Adams also testified at the hearing on defendant's motion. According to his testimony, he was patrolling when he heard that officers were reporting to a shooting, and he was among the first officers to arrive at the scene. There, the officers found a man bleeding on the floor and a woman who said that she had heard shots behind the house, which Lieutenant Adams explained to the court was in the same direction as the Friendship House. Upon hearing that Officer Hanley had followed two men from the Friendship House to the Taft Homes, Lieutenant Adams left the shooting scene and drove to the Taft Homes to provide backup. When he arrived, Lieutenant Adams saw Officer Hanley talking with defendant and Thomas. Officer Hanley informed Lieutenant Adams that the men had consented to a search of their persons but were refusing to consent to search of the Explorer. Believing probable cause existed to conduct a warrantless search, Lieutenant Adams directed Officer Hanley and other officers who had arrived at the Taft Homes to secure the two men and search the Explorer.

In support of his motion to quash the arrest and suppress the handgun, defendant argued that the search of the Explorer was unconstitutional. The State responded that as a mere passenger in the Explorer, defendant lacked standing to challenge the search. Because the parties had not addressed the issue of standing in their opening briefs, the court continued the hearing and allowed both sides time to file supplemental briefs. After receiving the supplemental briefs and hearing argument, the court ruled that defendant lacked standing, although it noted that if defendant had been the driver, the court would have granted the motion.

Defendant then filed a motion to suppress statements he made to police while in custody following the search. He argued that the stop and seizure of his person exceeded what was permissible for an investigative stop and that officers lacked probable cause to extend the seizure. Therefore, defendant argued, the statements he made to the police after his arrest were inadmissible fruits of the poisonous tree. The court denied the motion, finding that police had probable cause to arrest defendant after they found the gun in the Explorer.

After a stipulated bench trial, the court found defendant guilty of aggravated battery with a firearm (720 ILCS 5/12-4.2(a)(1) (West 2006)), aggravated unlawful use of a weapon (720 ILCS 5/24-1.6(a)(1) (West 2006)), and unlawful possession of a weapon by a felon (720 ILCS 5/24-1.1(a) (West 2006)). The court sentenced defendant to 12 years' imprisonment for aggravated battery, 7 years' imprisonment for aggravated unlawful use of a weapon, and 7 years' imprisonment for unlawful possession of a weapon by a felon, all sentences to run concurrently.

Defendant appealed, arguing the circuit court improperly denied his motions because the initial stop of defendant and Thomas had resulted in an unlawful arrest of defendant. The State continued to argue defendant lacked standing and, in the alternative, it argued the stop did not amount to an unlawful arrest. The appellate court affirmed (387 Ill.App.3d 780, 327 Ill.Dec. 127, 901 N.E.2d 455), finding the search of the Explorer was justified under Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968), and Michigan v. Long, 463 U.S. 1032, 103 S.Ct. 3469, 77 L.Ed.2d 1201 (1983). Because it found the search was constitutional, the appellate court declined to address the standing issue. 387 Ill.App.3d at 792, 327 Ill.Dec. 127, 901 N.E.2d 455.

Defendant also argued on appeal that his convictions for unlawful possession of a weapon by a felon and aggravated unlawful use of a weapon were premised on the same physical act, and therefore the convictions violated the one-act, one-crime rule. The State conceded that the two convictions violated the one-act, one-crime rule and that one of the convictions had to be vacated. However, while defendant argued unlawful possession of a weapon by a felon was the more serious offense, such that the aggravated unlawful use of a weapon conviction should be vacated, the State maintained aggravated unlawful use of a weapon was the greater offense, and the unlawful possession of a weapon by a felon must be vacated. The court agreed with the State, and therefore it vacated defendant's conviction for unlawful possession of a weapon by a felon and remanded the cause to the circuit court to amend the sentencing order. 387 Ill.App.3d at 795, 327 Ill.Dec. 127, 901 N.E.2d 455. We granted defendant's petition for leave to appeal pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 315 (210 Ill.2d R. 315).

ANALYSIS
Motions to Suppress

In reviewing a trial court's ruling on a motion to suppress evidence, we apply the two-part standard of review adopted by the Supreme Court in Ornelas v. United States, 517 U.S. 690, 699, 116 S.Ct. 1657, 1663, 134 L.Ed.2d 911, 920 (1996). People v. Cosby, 231 Ill.2d 262, 271, 325 Ill.Dec. 556, 898 N.E.2d 603 (2008), quoting People v. Luedemann, 222 Ill.2d 530, 542-43, 306 Ill.Dec. 94, 857 N.E.2d 187 (2006). Under this standard, we give deference to the factual findings of the trial court, and we will reject those findings only if they are against the manifest weight of the evidence. Cosby, 231 Ill.2d at 271, 325 Ill.Dec. 556, 898 N.E.2d 603, quoting Luedemann, 222 Ill.2d at 542-43, 306 Ill.Dec. 94, 857 N.E.2d 187. However, a reviewing court ‘remains free to undertake its own assessment of the facts in relation to the issues,’ and we review de novo the trial court's ultimate legal ruling as to whether suppression is warranted. Cosby, 231 Ill.2d at 271, 325 Ill.Dec. 556, 898 N.E.2d 603, quoting Luedemann, 222 Ill.2d at 542-43, 306 Ill.Dec. 94, 857 N.E.2d 187.

The fourth amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees the “right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.” U.S. Const., amend. IV. Reasonableness under the fourth amendment generally requires a warrant supported...

To continue reading

Request your trial
307 cases
  • People v. Thomas
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • 19 de março de 2019
    ...¶ 16 Reasonableness under the fourth amendment generally requires a warrant supported by probable cause. People v. Johnson , 237 Ill. 2d 81, 89, 340 Ill.Dec. 168, 927 N.E.2d 1179 (2010). A limited exception to the warrant requirement under Terry v. Ohio , 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.......
  • People v. Eyler
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • 5 de setembro de 2019
    ...the officer reasonably believes that the person has committed, or is about to, commit a crime."); People v. Johnson , 237 Ill. 2d 81, 89, 340 Ill.Dec. 168, 927 N.E.2d 1179, 1185 (2010) ("Under the Terry exception, a police officer may briefly stop a person for temporary questioning if the o......
  • People v. Sumler, 1–12–3381.
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • 26 de março de 2015
    ...have made clear that a defendant may not be convicted of multiple offenses based on the same act. See People v. Johnson, 237 Ill.2d 81, 97, 340 Ill.Dec. 168, 927 N.E.2d 1179 (2010) ; accord People v. Burney , 2011 IL App (4th) 100343, ¶ 86, 357 Ill.Dec. 477, 963 N.E.2d 430 (where a single a......
  • People v. Johnathan T. (In re Johnathan T.)
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • 21 de janeiro de 2022
    ... 2022 IL 127222 193 N.E.3d 1240 456 Ill.Dec. 832 IN RE JOHNATHAN T., a Minor (The People of the State of Illinois, Appellee, v. Johnathan ... Johnson , 227 Ill. App. 3d 800, 810, 169 Ill.Dec. 858, 592 N.E.2d 345 (1st Dist. 1992) (rejecting that ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • Procedures for Objections & Motions
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Illinois Objections
    • 1 de maio de 2013
    ...post-trial motion. People v. Martinez , 386 Ill App 3d 153, 897 NE2d 879 (1st Dist 2008), overruled on other grounds, People v. Johnson, 237 Ill 2d 81, 927 NE2d 1179 (2010); People v. Whirl , 351 Ill App 3d 464, 814 NE2d 872 (2004); People v. Barajas , 322 Ill App 3d 541, 749 NE2d 1047 (200......
  • Table of Cases
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Illinois Objections
    • 1 de maio de 2013
    ...53, 803 NE2d 405 (2003), §§1:60, 1:200 People v. Johnson , 220 Ill App 3d 550, 581 NE2d 118 (1991), §§19:40, 21:120 People v. Johnson , 237 Ill 2d 81 , 927 NE2d 1179 (2010), §1:270 People v. Johnson , 238 Ill 2d 478, 939 NE2d 475 (2010), §20:90 People v. Johnson, 238 Ill 2d 478, 939 NE2d 47......

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