People v. Gates

229 N.E.3d 1012

2023 IL App (1st) 211422

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

v.Quinton GATES, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 1-21-1422

Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, Sixth Division.

Filed November 17, 2023

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County. No. 17 CR 09924, The Honorable Charles P. Burns, Judge, presiding.

James E. Chadd, Douglas R. Hoff, and Peter Sgro, of State Appellate Defender’s Office, of Chicago, for appellant.

Kimberly M. Foxx, State’s Attorney, of Chicago (Enrique Abraham, David H. Iskowich, and Gerrard R. Burch Jr., Assistant State’s Attorneys, of counsel), for the People.

OPINION

JUSTICE HYMAN delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion.

¶ 1 Quinton Gates, 18 years and 2 months at the time of the offense, was convicted of first degree murder. Gates raises two issues: (i) the constitutionality of our supreme court’s administrative order, M.R. 30370 (In re Illinois Courts Response to COVID-19 Emergency/Impact on Trials, Ill. S. Ct., M.R. 30370 (eff. Mar. 20, 2020)), tolling of the speedy trial term during the recent pandemic and (ii) ineffective assistance of counsel at sentencing.

¶ 2 We find no violation of Gates’s right to a speedy trial. As to ineffective assistance, we find his counsel failed to challenge Gates’s sentence as a de facto life sentence. Not receiving effective representation at sentencing is constitutionally offensive and fundamentally wrong. Accordingly, we vacate his sentence and remand for resentencing.

¶ 3 Background

¶ 4 Trial Delay

¶ 5 On June 7, 2017, 18-year-old Quinton Gates was arrested for murder. Gates appeared in bond court on June 9 and was arraigned on July 14. Gates’s trial was initially scheduled for November 11, 2019, but continued by agreement to December 2 so the State could subpoena three witnesses. On December 2, Gates demanded trial. On February 28, 2020, the State sought and was granted a continuance to March 23.

¶ 6 On March 17, 2020, the Illinois Supreme Court issued M.R. 30370, directing courts to conduct nonessential matters remotely and reschedule criminal cases until 30 days after the Governor’s state of emergency ended. In re Illinois Courts Response to COVID-19 Emergency, Ill. S. Ct., M.R. 30370 (eff. Mar. 17, 2020). The court noted that the order "serve[d] the ends of justice and outweigh the best interests of the public and defendants in a speedy trial." In re Illinois Courts Response to COVID-19 Emergency/Impact on Trials, Ill. S. Ct., M.R. 30370 (eff. Apr. 7, 2020).

¶ 7 Finally, on June 30, 2021, the supreme court reinstated the speedy trial term beginning October 1, 2021, so dates before March 20, 2020, and after October 1, 2021, would be included in computing time for speedy trial purposes. In re Illinois Courts Response to COVID-19 Emergency/Impact cm Trials, Ill. S. Ct., M.R. 30370 (eff. June 30, 2021).

¶ 8 The sequence of relevant events for Gates’s speedy trial term can be summarized as follows:

GATES'S SPEEDY TRIAL TERM TIMELINE

Date	Event	Speedy Trial Term Day	Acting party
6/7/17	Arrest	State
6/8/17	Speedy trial term begins	Day 1	State
7/14/17	Arraignment	Circuit Court
First continuance by agreement; 37 total days by agreement until 12/2/19	Day 37	State and Gates
12/2/19	First demand for trial—Speedy trial term resumes	Day 38	Gates
State unable to subpoena witnesses	State
1/6/20	Second demand for trial	Day 73	Gates
1/13/20	Third demand for trial	Day 80	Gates
Fourth demand for trial	Day 112	Gates
2/14/20	State granted 60-day continuance under 725 ILCS 5/103-5(c); case continued by motion, tolling until 4/14/20	State
2/28/20	Fifth demand for trial	Day 112	Gates
3/16/20	Sixth demand for trial	Day 112	Gates
3/17/20	Supreme Court issues M.R. 30370	Day 112	Supreme
3/20/20	M.R. 30370 begins tolling of speedy trial term	Day 112	Court Supreme Court
4/14/20	60-day tolling per State’s 725 ILCS 5/103-5(c) motion ends; term tolled under M.R. 30370	Day 112
4/21/20	Denial of Gates’s motion to dismiss for violation of right to speedy trial and due process	Circuit court
4/22/20	Seventh demand	Day 112	Gates
4/27/20-	Gates demands trial 19 times; term still	Day 112	Gates
4/27/21	tolled under M.R. 30370
5/4/21	Trial	Day 112	Circuit Court

¶ 9 Trial Evidence

¶ 10 At trial, the State presented testimony from several witnesses.

¶ 11 Two witnesses, sisters Tremia Gilmore and Ishonna Gilmore, testified that they resided in a three-flat building with their other siblings in a neighborhood claimed as "Lowe Life" gang territory. On the evening of the shooting, they were with their cousin, a member of the Lowe Life gang, when Gates arrived and asked for him.

¶ 12 Terence Evans, who lived on the second floor, heard about seven shots. Evans went to the back and saw Gates shoot the cousin twice and yell "F*** Lowe Life" before leaving.

¶ 13 Several police investigators testified about their participation in the investigation. Detective Jeremy Morales testified that, the night of the shooting, he spoke to the Gilmore sisters and Evans outside the building. All three identified Gates by his nickname, "Man Man." With that information, Morales created a photo array, which included Gates’s photo. The next day, at the station, the Gilmore sisters and Evans identified Gates from his photo as the shooter.

¶ 14 Gates testified that he knew the Gilmore sisters, Evans, and the victim and had been friends until they affiliated with the "Lowe Life" gang. Gates ended the friendship in 2016, as he belonged to a rival gang. Gates denied being in Englewood on the day of the shooting.

¶ 15 The jury found Gates guilty of first degree murder and discharge of a firearm causing death. 720 ILCS 5/9-1(a)(1) (West 2010).

¶ 16 Sentencing

¶ 17 At the time of the sentencing hearing, Gates had served four years, four months, and eight days in prison since his arrest. The State called two witnesses and provided a statement by the victim’s mother. Before imposing sentence, the court asked both attorneys, "Do you think the firearm enhancements are mandatory for the defendant?" See 730 ILCS 5/5-4.5-105(b), (c) (West 2020). After some back-and-forth, the State answered, "I believe it is not discretionary." Defense counsel later stated, "I would just say if there was ambiguity, it should be resolved in Quinton’s favor. I think the trend in the law has been to move away from mandatory minimums when it comes to juvenile offenders and to allow judges more discretion."

¶ 18 In mitigation, the defense presented two documents: Gates’s high school diploma from York Alternative High School in June 2020 and an e-mail from one of the coordinators of the Alternative Programs and Education Department of the Cook County Department of Corrections verifying that Gates participated for nine months in the "Second Chance Program" and three months in the "Becoming a Man" program while in custody. Gates did not speak in elocution or submit to a presentence investigation interview.

¶ 19 The defense provided a sentencing memorandum. When Gates was 12, his mother, employed by the Chicago Transit Authority and the primary breadwinner, died suddenly. His father had occasional employment, and after Gates and his father were evicted from their home, they moved to Englewood. When his father went to prison for a federal gun offense, Gates lived with relatives, some of whom belonged to a gang.

¶ 20 Gates experienced more tragic loss. An older cousin and positive role model and mentor, Quintonio LaGrier, had mental health challenges but had attended college and worked part-time. During an episode at home, family members called police. A responding officer shot and killed LaGrier and a neighbor. Shortly afterward, one of Gates’s close friends was shot and killed. Defense counsel noted that Gates never received therapy or counseling for coping with his losses at a young age.

¶ 21 The court asked, "But the statutory factors are pretty clear that somebody has to be under the age of 18 for either the firearm enhancement or for the consideration of the Miller factors that were codified. Correct?" Defense counsel answered: "I think that that—sure, your Honor, is what the statute says. I think if there is any ambiguity, it must be resolved in [Gates’s] favor."

¶ 22 The trial court pronounced the sentencing option for this charge was 20 to 60 years of imprisonment before the firearm enhancement of 25 years. The trial court sentenced Gates to a total of 48 years imprisonment—23 years for murder plus 25 years under the habitual criminal statute for gun enhancement (id. § 5-4.5-95(b)). This sentence carries the possibility of parole after 20 years because Gates was under 21 at the time of the offense. Id. § 5-4.5415(b).

¶ 23 To reach this sentence, the trial court recognized that, when the crime occurred, Gates was just two months past his eighteenth birthday. The trial court con- sidered the Miller factors and whether a mandatory firearm enhancement was required. See Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460, 477-78, 132 S.Ct. 2455, 183 L.Ed.2d 407 (2012); Ill. Const. 1970, art. I, § 11; 730 ILCS 5/5-8-1 (West 2020).

¶ 24 The Miller factors led the court to sentence Gates toward the lower end of the sentencing range. The court considered Gates’s age to merit a lower sentence but found no evidence Gates lacked the maturity to understand his actions. In mitigation, the court considered the hardships caused by his mother’s death when he was 12, his father’s incarceration, and the violent deaths of extended family members and others close to him. The court also noted that Gates completed his high school diploma and participated in programs and activities while incarcerated.

¶ 25 In aggravation, the court discussed jail offenses for which Gates was reprimanded, noting that, although some were minor, like not wearing a face mask and hanging clothes inside his cell, some involved violence or disrespect for authority. In addition, Gates acted alone in committing the crime.

¶ 26 The court ruled that the proportionate penalties clause did not apply to Gates because he was the principal, not an...