People v. Hutson

1

2023 IL App (4th) 220995-U

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CHANCEY Y. HUTSON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 4-22-0995

Court of Appeals of Illinois, Fourth District

August 31, 2023

This Order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and is not precedent except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1).

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Macoupin County No. 19CF206 Honorable Joshua A. Meyer, Judge Presiding.

JUSTICE TURNER delivered the judgment of the court. Presiding Justice DeArmond and Justice Steigmann concurred in the judgment.

ORDER

TURNER JUSTICE

¶ 1 Held: The appellate court affirmed, concluding (1) defendant failed to show ineffective assistance of counsel or plain error when trial counsel did not object to the admission into evidence of a 911 recording and (2) defendant's sentence was not excessive.

¶ 2 In July 2019, the State charged defendant, Chancey Y Hutson, with three counts of first degree murder (720 ILCS 5/9-1(a)(1), (2), (3) (West 2014)) alleging, while committing a forcible felony, she intentionally and knowingly shot and killed Cody Adams. In August 2022, a jury acquitted defendant of intentional murder but found her guilty of the knowing and felony murder counts.

¶ 3 On appeal, defendant contends (1) it was plain error for the trial court to admit into evidence the recording of a 911 call made by the victim's father, and her counsel was ineffective for failing to object to it and (2) her 46-year sentence was excessive.

¶ 4 We determine defendant has failed to show counsel's lack of objection to the 911 recording was not a matter of reasonable trial strategy or that its admission was a clear and obvious error. The trial court's sentence was also not an abuse of discretion. Accordingly, we affirm.

¶ 5 I. BACKGROUND

¶ 6 The State charged defendant in connection with the January 1, 2015, shooting death of Cody Adams during an attempted burglary at Cody's home. Cody's father, Wayne Adams witnessed the shooting but was deceased at the time of trial.

¶ 7 Before trial, defense counsel filed several motions in limine, including a motion to introduce statements Wayne made to Paul Bouldin, a detective with the Macoupin County Sheriff's Office, in support of the theory the shooter was male. Counsel argued Wayne had reported to Bouldin that Cody told Wayne "he shot me." Wayne also reported he saw Cody struggling with a "guy" in a black hoodie. The trial court denied the motion, finding the statements were hearsay and not admissible as excited utterances.

¶ 8 A. Trial

¶ 9 In August 2022, a jury trial was held. Tabitha Rives, a dispatcher with the Macoupin County Sheriff's Office testified she took Wayne's 911 call connected to the shooting. The call, with audio lasting approximately 4 minutes and 18 seconds, was admitted into evidence and played for the jury without objection. During the call, Wayne was distraught and crying. He told the operator "somebody" broke into his house and shot his son. He said he did not know who the shooter was but, referring to the shooter, stated "he" had a hoodie on and "he" came running out of the kitchen. On two more occasions, Wayne stated the person wore a hoodie but did not refer to whether the shooter was a male or a female. After the time mark of approximately 1:44, the recording generally consisted of Wayne crying and the operator repeatedly stating "sir," as he was unresponsive to her questions.

¶ 10 Bouldin testified he responded to the call and found Cody on the landing between the kitchen and the basement stairs. He also spoke to Wayne, who was "in shock" and "completely shaken." As an offer of proof, defense counsel questioned Bouldin outside the presence of the jury about Wayne's statements he saw Cody struggle with a "guy," and Cody said a "guy" shot him. When asked if Wayne seemed "excited," Bouldin stated, "I guess," and "it was kind of hard for him to like put things together." Defense counsel renewed his motion in limine seeking to admit the statements, arguing the 911 recording and other statements made by Wayne had already been admitted. The trial court denied the motion, finding the statements Wayne made to Bouldin were inadmissible hearsay that did not qualify as excited utterances based on the totality of the circumstances and the amount of time that had passed. The court also noted even if Cody's statement to Wayne was an excited utterance, it was not admissible via Wayne's report of it to Bouldin.

¶ 11 Cody's mother, Ruth Adams, testified Cody lived with her, Wayne, and Cody's nephews, Stormmy and Clayton, at the time of his death. Cody helped take care of Wayne, who had muscular dystrophy and passed away in September 2021. On the night of the shooting, Ruth was home by 6 pm. Ruth, Wayne, and Cody planned on staying home that night, while Stormmy and Clayton, who were teenagers, left at 7 p.m. for an overnight event at the church down the block. Ruth went to bed around 9 p.m., and Wayne went to sleep in the recliner in the living room. Cody was playing video games in the living room.

¶ 12 The next morning, Ruth heard a commotion in the living room and thought she heard Wayne say he needed help. She had not heard any gunfire that morning. When she came into the living room, she saw Cody engaged in a physical tussle with another person. Ruth grabbed them to try to separate them and saw blood. Ruth thought she heard Cody say, "[g]et it out of me, mom," and she assumed he had been stabbed. Ruth started pulling on something and realized it was a gun barrel, but she failed to grab the gun. She then heard Cody say, "[g]et out of here, Mom." Cody fell down the steps to the back door while Ruth fought with the other person, who was wearing a mask and a hoodie. During the struggle, the mask fell off, and the person kicked it; however, Ruth could not see the person's face because "they" had the hoodie pulled down. Ruth testified the person was about 5'9" or 5'10" tall and had "skinny" arms. The person ran out the door after breaking the glass. Ruth chased "them" outside and down the block, but the person got away. Ruth did not see a second person in the house. The record contains evidence defendant was approximately 5'11" tall and had thin arms.

¶ 13 During her testimony, Ruth often referred to the shooter as "they" or "she." However, she also initially told the police she thought the shooter "was the neighbor guy" because he had a hoodie hanging on his front porch and lived in the same direction the person ran. Ruth testified she was in shock and "grasping for straws" when she made the statement to the police. She also repeated she knew the person was a woman because they had skinny arms, stating, "I know it's a woman now, and I did then." However, she did not tell the investigating officers it was a woman and referred to the shooter as "he" when she talked to the police because murderers are usually men.

¶ 14 The police recovered a ski mask with a skull design in the kitchen. DNA was found on the mask, and the test results were sent to the Illinois State Police crime lab. Police found a .22-caliber weapon in a ditch 150 to 200 feet from the residence. A .38-caliber cartridge case was found near the kitchen that could not have been ejected from a .22-caliber weapon. The police initially had no leads in the case, and it was moved to cold-case status.

¶ 15 In June 2017, Sergeant Patrick McGuire of the Illinois State Police received a phone call from the crime lab stating DNA from the mask matched with defendant. There were six other DNA profiles on the mask, three of which were identifiable. In addition to defendant's DNA, profiles matching Cody and a woman named Kailee Irvin were also identified.

¶ 16 McGuire interviewed defendant in July 2017. During the interview, defendant admitted being Facebook friends with Cody but said she did not know him well and had only met him once. She said she was not aware Cody had been killed. She stated she did not recognize a photograph of the mask and, when told her DNA was found on the mask, she responded, "Really." When asked to provide additional information about why her DNA was on the mask or who was with her at the scene of the crime, defendant asked for an attorney, and McGuire concluded the interview. Defendant provided additional DNA samples, which were also returned as a match to the DNA found on the mask.

¶ 17 The police obtained a search warrant for defendant's and Cody's Facebook accounts. They were friends on Facebook and had exchanged messages. On the day before the murder, defendant and Cody had a conversation over Facebook Messenger. Defendant told Cody she wanted him to come over. He responded he could not because he was with his son. Defendant asked if she could come to Cody's home if she could get a taxi, indicating she knew where Cody lived. He said no to that as well.

¶ 18 In September 2018, McGuire interviewed defendant a second time. During the interview, defendant initially denied any knowledge of the murder but then became tearful and said, "I'm going to prison for a long time, ain't I?" Defendant told McGuire she and a person named "D," who McGuire testified was William Kavanaugh, went to Cody's house early on New Year's Day to commit a burglary. She said they thought Cody would not be home and did not know Cody lived with other people. Defendant said the burglary was Kavanaugh's idea and the plan was to steal anything they could sell. Defendant initially told the police they arrived in Kavanaugh's truck and entered through an unlocked back door. She indicated Cody was sitting and watching TV, and Kavanaugh put a gun to his head. Defendant said Kavanaugh shot Cody, and they both ran out of the house.

¶ 19 Shortly...