Case Law People v. McCovins

People v. McCovins

Document Cited Authorities (10) Cited in (31) Related

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Michael J. Pelletier, State Appellate Defender, Patricia Unsinn, Deputy Defender, Alan D. Goldberg, Deputy Defender, Office of the State Appellate Defender (David T. Harris, Assistant Appellate Defender), Chicago, for Appellant.

Anita M. Alvarez, State's Attorney of Cook County (James E. Fitzgerald, Peggy Ann Gill-Curtin, Alan J. Spellberg, Eve Reilly, of counsel), for Appellee.

OPINION

Justice PUCINSKI delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion. *

[354 Ill.Dec. 402] ¶ 1 Following a jury trial, defendant Rayvon McCovins was convicted of one count of aggravated battery with a firearm and one count of simple battery. He was sentenced to concurrent terms of 8 1/2 years and 364 days. On appeal, defendant contends his convictions should be reversed and his case remanded for a new trial because the trial court violated Illinois Supreme Court Rule 431(b) (eff. May 1, 2007), which requires the trial court to question prospective jurors about their understanding and acceptance of the four principles set forth in the rule. The issue in the instant case is not whether a Rule 431(b) discussion occurred, but whether the inquiry satisfied Rule 431(b).

¶ 2 In an opinion filed on March 4, 2010, this court found that the trial court's methodology satisfied Rule 431(b) and upheld defendant's conviction. People v. McCovins, 399 Ill.App.3d 323, 340 Ill.Dec. 487, 928 N.E.2d 486 (2010). Thereafter, on March 7, 2011, the Illinois Supreme Court issued a supervisory order directing this court to vacate its judgment and reconsider its prior ruling in light of People v. Thompson, 238 Ill.2d 598, 345 Ill.Dec. 560, 939 N.E.2d 403 (2010). People v. McCovins, 239 Ill.2d 574, 346 Ill.Dec. 547, 940 N.E.2d 1151 (2011) (table). On March 23, 2011, this court granted defendant leave to file a supplemental brief. On reconsideration, we again affirm defendant's conviction.

[354 Ill.Dec. 403] ¶ 3 BACKGROUND

¶ 4 Defendant was charged with two counts of attempted first degree murder (720 ILCS 5/8–4(a), 9–1(a)(1) (West 2006)), two counts of aggravated battery with a firearm (720 ILCS 5/12–4.2 (West 2006)), and three counts of aggravated battery (720 ILCS 5/12–4(b)(8) (West 2006)) in connection to an October 31, 2006, shooting of Jasmine Powell and Brytnnie Smith. The State nol-prossed the three aggravated battery counts and defendant elected to proceed by way of jury trial on the remaining charges.

¶ 5 At trial, Jasmine Smith (Jasmine S.) 1 testified that on October 31, 2006, at approximately 6 p.m. she was in a candy store located on the corner of Homan Street and Huron Street with her friends Jasmine Powell (Jasmine P.), Keisha Johnson, Neisha Johnson and “Bobo,” a nine-year-old child. Jasmine Broxton, defendant's sister, was also in the store and threw an egg at Keisha. In response, Neisha punched Broxton in the face. Neisha, Keisha, Jasmine P., and Bobo then “jumped on” Broxton. The fight was broken up by several boys who were at the scene, one of whom, named “Smack,” drove Broxton away from the store.

¶ 6 Jasmine S. and her friends left the store and began walking down Christiana Street located nearby, and Nicole White, one of Jasmine S.'s friends, joined them. Defendant lived on Christiana Street and Jasmine S. and her friends encountered him as they were walking down the street. When White saw defendant, she swung a belt buckle at him. Bobo also struck defendant. In response, defendant ran across the street and entered his residence. Defendant exited his house shortly thereafter, holding a gun in his hands. When defendant was approximately 20 feet away from Jasmine S. and her friends, he began shooting at them. Jasmine S. ran away from defendant and heard him fire approximately nine shots. Jasmine S. also heard Jasmine P. and Brytnnie Smith (Brytnnie S.) cry out as they were running down the street.

¶ 7 Jasmine S. indicated that at the time of the shooting, she lived approximately one block away from defendant and had known defendant for approximately one year.

¶ 8 Jasmine P. confirmed that on October 31, 2006, she participated in a fight involving Jasmine Broxton, defendant's sister. After the fight, when Jasmine P. and her friends were on Christiana Street, they were approached by defendant, who inquired about the altercation involving his younger sister. When Jasmine P. “made a smart comment” in response to defendant's inquiry, defendant revealed that he had a gun in the waistband of his pants. At that time, a police car drove through the neighborhood and defendant ran off. When defendant returned to Christiana Street, Nicole White confronted him about pulling a gun on Jasmine P. and tried to hit him with a belt. Defendant ran off a second time. When he returned, defendant began chasing Jasmine P. and her friends and shot at them. As she was running away, Jasmine P. felt something go through her leg but she kept running until she reached an alley. After defendant shot her in the leg, Jasmine P. was taken to John Stroger Hospital to receive medical treatment. Her bone had been shattered and she stayed in the hospital for approximately six days.

[354 Ill.Dec. 404] ¶ 9 Brytnnie S. testified that at approximately 6:40 p.m. on October 31, 2006, she was “hanging around” with her friend Latoya Morgan on the 700 block of Christiana Street. She observed Jasmine S., Jasmine P. and Nicole White at that location. Defendant was outside across the street from his house, but retreated into his residence when some young boys threw bottles at him. Defendant then ran outside and started shooting. Brytnnie S. saw that defendant's arm was extended, but she did not remember seeing a gun in defendant's hands. She heard defendant fire approximately eight shots. Brytnnie S. began running north toward a nearby alley when defendant began shooting. As she was running, Brytnnie S. felt a “hard pounding” on the right side of her back. She almost fell, but was able to catch herself. When Brytnnie S. entered the alley, she saw Jasmine P. Jasmine P. had fallen to the ground and said that she had been shot in the leg. Police arrived at the scene and Brytnnie S. informed them that defendant had shot her. Brytnnie S. was then taken to Mount Sinai hospital. That evening, detectives assembled a photo array for Brytnnie S. to view and she was able to identify defendant as the shooter. Brytnnie S. had known defendant for approximately 10 years prior to the shooting.

¶ 10 On November 3, 2006, Brytnnie S. found a bullet in the lining of her coat. She called the police and they removed the bullet. On November 6, 2006, Brytnnie S. received a phone call from defendant. During the conversation, defendant asked her if she was okay and then indicated that he had not seen her in the crowd when he fired his weapon. Defendant informed Brytnnie S. that he would not have fired his gun if he had known that she was present.

¶ 11 Chicago police officer Brian Thomas testified that on October 31, 2006, at approximately 6:35 p.m., he and his partner received a dispatch over the radio about a shooting. In response, Officer Thomas and his partner drove to 745 North Christiana. At that location, Officer Smith encountered Jasmine P. and Brytnnie S. Jasmine P. had been shot in the leg and Brytnnie S. had a gunshot wound to her back. Officer Thomas conversed with the victims before they were transported to hospitals to receive medical treatment. Brytnnie S. and Jasmine P. both identified defendant as the shooter. Officer Thomas attempted to locate defendant that evening but he was not present at his house.

¶ 12 Detective Roland Rios testified that he and his partner, Jose Garcia, were assigned to investigate the shooting of Jasmine P. and Brytnnie S. Detective Rios conversed with Brytnnie S. in the emergency room at Mount Sinai hospital and she identified defendant as the shooter. After interviewing Brytnnie S., Detective Rios traveled to the scene of the shooting and attempted to interview possible witnesses to the shooting, but was unsuccessful. Detective Rios next interviewed Jasmine P. at Stroger Hospital. Jasmine P. also identified defendant as the man who shot her. Both Brytnnie S. and Jasmine P. used the name “Woods” to identify defendant. After conversing with the victims, Detective Rios generated a photo array, in which he included defendant's picture. Brytnnie S. viewed the photographs and identified defendant as the man who shot her.

¶ 13 Officer Orlando Velasquez testified that on November 3, 2006, he and his partner, Lester Wright, traveled to Brytnnie S.'s house located at 730 North Spaulding. When they arrived at her residence, Brytnnie S. handed Officer Velasquez a black leather jacket and directed his attention to a hole in the top of her jacket. Officer Velasquez found a spent bullet in the lining of Brytnnie S.'s jacket. He subsequently recovered and inventoried the bullet.

¶ 14 Chicago police officer Brian Leclair testified that on November 8, 2006, at approximately 6 a.m., he and his partner traveled to 530 North Sawyer after receiving information that defendant was at that location. After entering the building, Officer Leclair went to the second floor and discovered defendant hiding in a closet under a pile of clothing. After ordering defendant out of the closet, Officer Leclair took defendant into custody. Following Officer Leclair's testimony, the State rested its case.

¶ 15 Misty Woods, defendant's sister, testified for the defense. On October 31, 2006, she was living with her family in a residence located at 718 North Christiana. At approximately 5:30 p.m., Woods heard the sound of glass windows cracking. Woods opened the front door, stepped out onto the porch and saw a crowd of 20 or 30 people outside....

5 cases
Document | Illinois Supreme Court – 2021
People v. Birge
"...if jurors understood and accepted the principles and instead asked if they had " ‘any problems’ " with the principles); People v. McCovins , 2011 IL App (1st) 081805-B, ¶ 36, 354 Ill.Dec. 401, 957 N.E.2d 1194 (court provided prospective jurors with a broad statement of the law "interspersed..."
Document | Appellate Court of Illinois – 2020
People v. Kinnerson
"...no such requirement.¶ 63 To support his argument on appeal, defendant also cites the First District's decision in People v. McCovins , 2011 IL App (1st) 081805–B, 354 Ill.Dec. 401, 957 N.E.2d 1194. There, the trial court "failed to abide by the mandatory question and response process requir..."
Document | Appellate Court of Illinois – 2019
People v. Reveles-Cordova
"...him; his sole witness's testimony did the most damage in independently corroborating J.B.'s version of events. See People v. McCovins , 2011 IL App (1st) 081805-B, ¶ 39, 354 Ill.Dec. 401, 957 N.E.2d 1194 (finding the evidence against the defendant was not closely balanced even where he impe..."
Document | Appellate Court of Illinois – 2016
People v. Clark
"...whether they understood and accepted those principles.¶ 56 We note defendant also cites two First District cases—People v. McCovins, 2011 IL App (1st) 081805, 957 N.E.2d 1194, and People v. Johnson, 408 Ill. App. 3d 157, 945 N.E.2d 610 (2010)—to support his position on appeal. However, thos..."
Document | Appellate Court of Illinois – 2019
People v. Steskal
"...prosecutions is plain error." People v. Stevens, 2018 IL App (4th) 160138, ¶ 75, 115 N.E.3d 1207.¶ 42 Citing Thompson, and People v. McCovins, 2011 IL App (1st) 081805-B, 957 N.E.2d 1194, defendant contends "collapsing" the four principles into one question regarding acceptance (as opposed ..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
5 cases
Document | Illinois Supreme Court – 2021
People v. Birge
"...if jurors understood and accepted the principles and instead asked if they had " ‘any problems’ " with the principles); People v. McCovins , 2011 IL App (1st) 081805-B, ¶ 36, 354 Ill.Dec. 401, 957 N.E.2d 1194 (court provided prospective jurors with a broad statement of the law "interspersed..."
Document | Appellate Court of Illinois – 2020
People v. Kinnerson
"...no such requirement.¶ 63 To support his argument on appeal, defendant also cites the First District's decision in People v. McCovins , 2011 IL App (1st) 081805–B, 354 Ill.Dec. 401, 957 N.E.2d 1194. There, the trial court "failed to abide by the mandatory question and response process requir..."
Document | Appellate Court of Illinois – 2019
People v. Reveles-Cordova
"...him; his sole witness's testimony did the most damage in independently corroborating J.B.'s version of events. See People v. McCovins , 2011 IL App (1st) 081805-B, ¶ 39, 354 Ill.Dec. 401, 957 N.E.2d 1194 (finding the evidence against the defendant was not closely balanced even where he impe..."
Document | Appellate Court of Illinois – 2016
People v. Clark
"...whether they understood and accepted those principles.¶ 56 We note defendant also cites two First District cases—People v. McCovins, 2011 IL App (1st) 081805, 957 N.E.2d 1194, and People v. Johnson, 408 Ill. App. 3d 157, 945 N.E.2d 610 (2010)—to support his position on appeal. However, thos..."
Document | Appellate Court of Illinois – 2019
People v. Steskal
"...prosecutions is plain error." People v. Stevens, 2018 IL App (4th) 160138, ¶ 75, 115 N.E.3d 1207.¶ 42 Citing Thompson, and People v. McCovins, 2011 IL App (1st) 081805-B, 957 N.E.2d 1194, defendant contends "collapsing" the four principles into one question regarding acceptance (as opposed ..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex