People v. Coffman

2019 IL App (4th) 170115-U

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JOSEPH M. COFFMAN, Defendant-Appellant.

NO. 4-17-0115

APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FOURTH DISTRICT

July 25, 2019

NOTICE

This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1).

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Pike County

No. 14CF61

Honorable Diane M. Lagoski, Judge Presiding.

JUSTICE DeARMOND delivered the judgment of the court.

Justices Steigmann and Cavanagh concurred in the judgment.

ORDER

¶ 1 Held: The appellate court affirmed defendant's conviction for first degree murder, finding the trial court did not err in (1) denying his motion to suppress, (2) denying his request for an involuntary manslaughter instruction, and (3) sentencing him to 45 years in prison.

¶ 2 In October 2015, a jury found defendant, Joseph M. Coffman, guilty of first degree murder. The trial court sentenced him to 45 years in prison.

¶ 3 On appeal, defendant argues (1) the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress, (2) the court erred in denying defense counsel's request for an involuntary manslaughter instruction, and (3) his 45-year sentence is excessive. We affirm.

¶ 4 I. BACKGROUND

¶ 5 In July 2014, the State charged defendant by information with one count of first degree murder (720 ILCS 5/9-1(a)(1) (West 2012)), alleging he, without lawful justification and with the intent to do great bodily harm to Dennis Coffman, stabbed Dennis multiple times with a knife, thereby causing Dennis's death. Defendant pleaded not guilty.

¶ 6 A. Motion to Suppress

¶ 7 In July 2015, defendant filed a motion to suppress evidence pursuant to section 114-11 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (725 ILCS 5/114-11 (West 2014)). In the motion, defendant stated he was arrested in connection with Dennis's murder on July 19, 2014. On July 21, 2014, defendant made statements in response to interrogation by members of the Pike County Sheriff's Department. Having been informed of his rights under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), on July 19, 2014, defendant asserted his right to remain silent. The statements sought to be suppressed were obtained as a result of interrogation that continued after defendant elected to remain silent. Defendant argued all questioning should have ceased immediately and the police later reinitiated questioning in violation of Miranda. Thus, he claimed any statements made were involuntary and should be suppressed.

¶ 8 In its written response, the State agreed defendant invoked his right to remain silent on July 19 and made further statements to the police on July 21. However, the State contended defendant specifically requested to talk to the police after initially invoking his rights. Further, the State noted defendant only made statements on July 21 after being fully advised of his rights and making a knowing, voluntary waiver of his rights.

¶ 9 At the hearing on the motion to suppress, Michael Lister, a correctional officer at the Pike County jail, testified defendant asked to speak with Deputy David Greenwood on July 21, 2014. Lister then contacted Greenwood.

¶ 10 Pike County Sheriff's Deputy David Greenwood testified he was on duty on July 21, 2014, when he told Lister to contact him if defendant needed anything. Greenwood wenthome and then received a call from Lister stating defendant wanted to talk to him. Greenwood returned and met with defendant. The entire encounter between defendant and Greenwood was videotaped. Greenwood stated he read the Miranda warnings to defendant and had him sign a form documenting his rights. Greenwood believed the interview lasted between 45 and 50 minutes.

¶ 11 On cross-examination, Greenwood testified defendant was shackled when he was brought into the interview room. After asking for cigarettes, defendant was allowed to smoke in the room. When Greenwood asked a question about the case, defendant said he did not want to talk without a lawyer. Greenwood then asked defendant what he wanted to talk about, and defendant "just started talking" about religion, his family history, and "all kinds of stuff."

¶ 12 The parties stipulated two special agents of the Illinois State Police attempted to interview defendant on July 19, 2014, they advised him of the Miranda warnings, and defendant indicated he did not wish to speak with them. The parties also agreed to have the trial court watch the videotaped interview.

¶ 13 In the videotape, Greenwood informed defendant they were being recorded, read him his Miranda rights, and told him to sign the waiver-of-rights form if he understood his rights. Defendant signed the form. Greenwood asked defendant how he had been treated, and defendant said he had not yet taken a shower. Greenwood stated he would talk to someone. He then stated Dennis's mother, Diana Harris, wanted defendant to know she and the family were not mad at him. Shortly thereafter, Greenwood asked defendant what he wanted to talk about. Defendant stated he wanted to talk about Dennis's children. Greenwood stated he had talked to the family, including Skippy Coffman, who "thinks a lot about" defendant.

¶ 14 Greenwood then stated he listened to the 9-1-1 calls defendant made and indicated his concern as to whether the offense occurred in Illinois or Missouri. Defendant stated he "didn't want to get into that" and he wanted to see a lawyer before he talked about it. Greenwood said "okay" and asked defendant if there was anything else he wanted to talk about. Defendant apologized for getting Greenwood's "hopes up," but Greenwood dismissed the concern and mentioned he had simply been told defendant wanted to talk with him and wanted to get off suicide watch.

¶ 15 Defendant stated he was having trouble "feeling," and Greenwood asked how he could help. Defendant said he wanted to talk to somebody, and Greenwood stated he could see about getting someone to come talk to him and that he was there for him. When defendant did not respond, Greenwood suggested defendant ask questions. Defendant asked if Dennis's wife was mad, and Greenwood said there were tears but the family was not mad. Greenwood asked defendant if he wanted something to drink, and after some thought, defendant stated he "would kill for a cigarette right now." Greenwood offered to try to find one and defendant laughed. Greenwood left and returned with a can of pop. Shortly thereafter, an officer delivered a pack of cigarettes to the room, and defendant smoked as he talked.

¶ 16 Greenwood mentioned defendant's Native American heritage, and defendant stated he was Apache and talked about his heritage. Defendant stated he felt "lost." When asked why, defendant stated he had "so much hatred." Defendant said he hated people that gave him "looks" and people that judge, play mind games, and are "two-faced." Defendant then discussed the incident for the remainder of the conversation.

¶ 17 In its written ruling, the trial court found it undisputed that defendant invoked his fifth amendment rights on July 19, 2014, in the first attempt by the state police to interview him.

The court found Greenwood spoke with defendant on July 21, 2014, and told him he could ask to speak with him if he needed anything. Defendant later asked to speak with Greenwood. After Greenwood returned and read the Miranda warnings to defendant, they began conversing. Within five minutes, Greenwood began questioning defendant as to whether the incident took place in Missouri or Illinois. The court stated defendant indicated he "did not want to get into that and that he wanted to see a lawyer before getting into that." Greenwood responded by asking defendant what he wanted to talk about. The court found Greenwood and defendant "discussed many topics including family, religion and the emotions that defendant was feeling." The court stated that, "[a]t some point, during the conversations about other matters, the defendant began discussing the incident in question without being prompted to by Greenwood."

¶ 18 The trial court found "defendant made a limited invocation of his right to an attorney when he indicated he did not want to speak to Greenwood about the night in question without an attorney." The court also found Greenwood did not seek information about the night in question after the invocation of the right to counsel and "[i]t was near the end of the interview that defendant at his own choosing began discussing the night in question." While "defendant did not affirmatively state a desire to continue speaking after his limited invocation of his right to counsel ***, his actions in continuing to speak and cooperate showed he was willing to do so." The court denied the motion to suppress.

¶ 19 B. Jury Trial

¶ 20 In October 2015, defendant's jury trial commenced. Pike County Sheriff Paul Petty testified he arrived on the scene of a reported stabbing on the interstate at approximately 1:17 a.m. on July 19, 2014. In a small truck, he observed an unresponsive Dennis slumped toward the passenger side. Petty also saw defendant patting Dennis's head and comforting him.

Defendant was immediately removed from the vehicle without incident. Petty stated defendant had blood on his hands, shirt, and pants.

¶ 21 Lisa Potter testified she worked as a 9-1-1 dispatcher in Marion County, Missouri, and received a call in the early morning hours of July 19, 2014. She stated a male called, "hysterical, telling me that he just stabbed his brother to death." The male told her he was calling from Missouri, but her global positioning system map told her the caller was in Illinois. Once she determined the caller was in Illinois, she transferred the call to Pike County, Illinois. The State played the 9-1-1 call for the jury.

¶ 22 Karen Ormond testified she was traveling with her husband and six-month-old child between Hannibal, Missouri, and Quincy, Illinois, on July 19, 2014, at approximately 1 a.m. As they traveled into Illinois, she...