People v. Singer

2021 IL App (2d) 200314

194 N.E.3d 890

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

v.Paxton Dale SINGER, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 2-20-0314

Appellate Court of Illinois, Second District.

Filed September 2, 2021

Rehearing Denied September 29, 2021

Terry A. Ekl and Tracy L. Stanker, of Ekl, Williams & Provenzale, LLC, of Lisle, for appellant.

Jamie L. Mosser, State's Attorney, of St. Charles (Patrick Delfino, Edward R. Psenicka, and Lynn M. Harrington, of State's Attorneys Appellate Prosecutor's Office, of counsel), for the People.

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

¶ 1 Following a bench trial, defendant, Paxton Dale Singer, was convicted of the offense of disorderly conduct ( 720 ILCS 5/26-1(a)(1) (West 2016)). In ruling on defendant's posttrial motion, the trial court found that the evidence against defendant was insufficient. The court nevertheless granted a new trial, giving the State leave to amend its complaint. Defendant filed a motion to dismiss the charge on double-jeopardy grounds, which the court denied. The court rescinded its order granting a new trial, and sentenced defendant to 12 months’ court supervision. Defendant appeals. We reverse his conviction because defendant was twice put in jeopardy for the same offense.

¶ 2 I. BACKGROUND

¶ 3 On October 17, 2018, the Kane County state's attorney charged defendant by complaint with sexual exploitation of a child (count I) ( 720 ILCS 5/11-9.1(a-5) (West 2016)) and disorderly conduct (count II). These charges arose from text messages containing sexual innuendo that defendant, the youth pastor at Harvest Bible Church in Aurora, sent to the minor victim, J.S. At a bench trial commencing on September 4, 2019, the court acquitted defendant of sexual exploitation of a child but convicted him of disorderly conduct.

¶ 4 Count II (disorderly conduct) alleged that defendant "knowingly texted J.S., age 16, and asked him how often he jerks off and asked J.S. to spend a weekend with [defendant] in such an unreasonable manner as to alarm and disturb parents [names manually crossed out] and provoke a breach of the peace." On July 2, 2019, the State amended count II to allege that the offense occurred between "on or about December 1, 2017, through December 31, 2017."

¶ 5 A. The State's Motion in Limine to Admit Other-Crimes Evidence

¶ 6 On June 26, 2019, the State moved to admit evidence of "other sex acts" pursuant to Illinois Rule of Evidence 404(b) (eff. Jan. 1, 2011). Pertinent to this appeal, the court found that certain text messages of a sexual nature that defendant sent to 17-year-old T.N. were admissible "as a common design" to prove only the disorderly conduct charge.

¶ 7 B. The State's Evidence at Trial

¶ 8 Defendant's bench trial commenced on September 4, 2019. After the State introduced into evidence a series of text messages between defendant and T.N., and another series of text messages between defendant and J.S., the State called the following witnesses.

¶ 9 1. Kurt Gebhards

¶ 10 Kurt Gebhards testified to the following. From April 2016 through July 2018, he was the pastor at the Rolling Meadows campus of the church. In 2017, the Aurora church employed defendant as a youth director at its campus. One of defendant's roles was to mentor small groups of students. The church had established guidelines governing appropriate interactions between defendant and the students. Overnights with students were not within those guidelines.

¶ 11 By January 2018, Gebhards had learned that defendant sent inappropriate texts to T.N. On January 7, 2018, Gebhards, along with three other church leaders, met with defendant. At that meeting, defendant acknowledged the wrongfulness of his conduct and agreed that he should be terminated from his position. Defendant signed a letter of resignation.

¶ 12 2. Landon MacDonald

¶ 13 Landon MacDonald testified to the following. As defendant's immediate boss, MacDonald was one of the church leaders present at the January 7, 2018, meeting when defendant resigned his employment. Without disclosing the content of the texts between defendant and T.N., MacDonald termed it "inappropriate subject matter to be talking about with a teenager." On cross-examination, MacDonald acknowledged that defendant later denied the truth of the document that he signed when resigning his employment.

¶ 14 3. C.N.

¶ 15 C.N. is T.N.’s father. He testified to the following. When T.N. was 16 years old, he met defendant at a church retreat. In the fall of 2017, defendant became T.N.’s spiritual mentor. In December 2017, C.N. began monitoring text messages between defendant and T.N. C.N.’s concerns about those texts caused him to disclose the texts to the church's executive pastor the following January.¹ C.N. was "extremely disturbed, fearful for my son" and "fearful" that defendant had betrayed a position of trust "for his own sexual desire." According to C.N., the church reported the matter to civil authorities, with whom both he and T.N. cooperated. On cross-examination, C.N. admitted that he allowed T.N. to continue texting with defendant even after he saw the initial messages. C.N. testified that he was "letting [defendant] hang himself." C.N. testified that those texts alarmed and disturbed him so much that he did not sleep for a week.

¶ 16 4. J.S.

¶ 17 J.S. testified that he was born on October 27, 2001. He was 17 years old at the time of trial and was a high school senior. In the summer between eighth grade and high school, J.S. met defendant at a church camp in Michigan. Defendant was J.S.’s cabin leader and then he became J.S.’s spiritual advisor. They maintained a texting relationship from summer 2017 through December 2018, although they also met in person several times.²

¶ 18 J.S. read some of their text messages into the record, as follows. In February 2017, defendant asked J.S. what kind of underwear he preferred and asked for a picture. J.S. photographed a pair of his underwear lying on the floor. Defendant replied that he wanted to see J.S. in the underwear. J.S. said that his underwear was "tight," and defendant responded, "So?" Then J.S. told defendant that his mother asked J.S. why defendant wanted such a photograph. Defendant texted: "I just realized how weird that sounds. My bad." In August 2017, defendant again brought up the subject of underwear and suggested that J.S. model his boxers to defendant on FaceTime. In December 2017, defendant had asked J.S. to stay overnight at his house, but J.S.’s parents did not allow it. Defendant also asked J.S. whether he watched pornography. When J.S. stated that he had little interest in doing so, defendant counseled that that was good and that viewing such material sent one to a "dark place." J.S. testified that he ceased texting with defendant in December 2018.

¶ 19 On cross-examination, J.S. testified that he was always truthful with defendant. J.S. testified that his mother found out that defendant wanted a photo of J.S. in his underwear when J.S. laughed aloud at the text. J.S. texted in July 2017 that his parents would allow him to stay overnight with defendant. On August 7, 2017, J.S. again texted defendant that his parents would allow an overnight stay. However, in December 2017, J.S. told defendant that he could not stay over because of a family get-together. According to J.S., his parents were never "upset" in December 2017 over his text messages with defendant.

¶ 20 5. D.S.

¶ 21 D.S., J.S.’s father, testified to the following. D.S. approved of the friendship between defendant and J.S. because their families were involved in the church and defendant was in a leadership position. D.S. knew what defendant's professional responsibilities required, and overnights with the students were not allowed. D.S. testified that in November 2017 defendant wanted J.S. to stay over with him.

¶ 22 When the prosecutor asked D.S. whether he was aware of any "inappropriate" texts between defendant and J.S., D.S. answered, "I certainly questioned them. I didn't understand them, was kind of confused by them." D.S. reiterated: "I was confused, is the word I would use, by those texts." According to D.S., "[Defendant and our family] had a trusting relationship that I felt that we built up over the time, and I didn't understand it, the nature of it."

¶ 23 D.S. testified that he told his wife, M., in December 2017 that he was going to call defendant and tell him that a sleepover with J.S. "isn't going to happen." D.S. explained to defendant in that call that such an arrangement "looks inappropriate." D.S. quoted scripture to defendant regarding "not a hint of sexual immorality," but, according to D.S., "I wasn't going to win my brother over to my thinking," so he ended the conversation. D.S. testified that he took no further action, "not with [defendant] and not with anybody else at that time." Although, according to D.S., he prohibited J.S. from further communication with defendant.

¶ 24 After D.S. learned that the church had fired defendant, he met with Craig Steiner, the pastor of the Aurora campus, on January 31, 2018. D.S. disclosed the text messages to Steiner. D.S. described those messages as being "totally inappropriate." When the prosecutor asked D.S. if those texts were "disturbing" to him, D.S. said, "Oh, I felt uncomfortable—" D.S. said again, "I felt uncomfortable." He explained, "It seemed out of character that [defendant] would be sending those texts to my son like that. So I felt very uncomfortable about it." The prosecutor asked D.S. if he talked to his wife about it. D.S. answered, "We talked about it off and on, yes." D.S. testified that defendant's request for a sleepover was the "last straw" and "that's when me and my wife talked about I think we're going to pull this back."

¶ 25 D.S. testified that he called defendant because he thought that they had a "good trusting relationship" and "it was so out of character. And that's why it was disturbing to me, the repeated questions, and...