The Sixth District affirmed a 13-to-16.5-year prison sentence for attempted RICO, burglary, and related offenses, holding that the trial court did not violate the defendant’s right to allocution by refusing a mid-hearing request to consult with counsel and that burglary and attempted grand theft of a motor vehicle are not allied offenses of similar import.
The Fifth District affirmed convictions for gross sexual imposition against a minor, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by ruling a child victim incompetent to testify without an in-person hearing and that the Confrontation Clause does not guarantee the right to comment on a witness’s absence at trial.
The Ninth District reversed in part a discovery order compelling disclosure of oil and gas drilling strategies, finding that the trial court failed to consider supplemental trade secret evidence and remanding for a protective order.
The Ninth District affirmed a domestic violence conviction, holding that the trial court’s failure to advise the defendant of his right to a jury trial and right to remain silent at arraignment was not prejudicial where the defendant later knowingly waived a jury trial through written motion.
The Ninth District affirmed the conviction of a commercial driver for running a red light, holding that the necessity defense was available but that the defendant failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that stopping would have created a greater danger.
The Ninth District reversed the suppression of OVI evidence, holding that a state trooper’s observations of slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and the odor of alcohol during a valid traffic stop gave rise to reasonable suspicion to expand the stop into an OVI investigation.
The Second District affirmed the denial of a motion to terminate spousal support, finding the trial court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that the ex-wife’s living arrangement with an unrelated male did not constitute cohabitation sufficient to terminate support.
The First District affirmed a conviction for violating a civil stalking protection order where the defendant contacted the protected party through a fake Facebook account, holding that the victim’s identification of the account was sufficient evidence.
The Fifth District affirms that a proffer meeting constituted a plea discussion under Rule 402, limiting the State’s use of the defendant’s statement to impeachment only if he testifies inconsistently.
The Eighth District affirmed temporary custody of an infant to CCDCFS, finding clear and convincing evidence of neglect based on the mother’s pattern of conduct including threats while holding the child, a prior child’s neglect adjudication, and refusal to engage in case-plan services.