Nam lacinia pulvinar tortor nec facilisis. Defendant argues *265this could not have been the legislatures intent when it provided a witness must testify at the proceedings for the prior statement to be admissible. Kagama. Augustina is the mother of J.O. To establish ineffective assistance of counsel, defendant must establish (1) his counsels performance was so deficient the attorney was not functioning as counsel guaranteed by the sixth amendment to the United States Constitution, and (2) he was prejudiced by the deficient performance. Defendant suggests R.K.s inability to pinpoint when the sex act occurred and certain inconsistencies rendered her statement unreliable. said that on two occasions about a month earlier, Jason had touched her private part.. "[102] He noted that such authority was not in the Indian Treaty Clause[103] nor the Indian Commerce Clause. Luckey testified he received additional training in April 2007 and May 2007. The judge admonished the venire about the principles that the jurors must presume the defendant's innocence, the State must prove the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the defendant has no duty to present any evidence, and the jurors must not hold against the defendant his exercise of his right not to testify. 126682 People State of Illinois, Appellee, v. Harold Blalock, Appellant. However, she testified he was alone with the children once or twice for approximately two hours when she went to the grocery store. explained that when she and her sister slept at Shelley's home, they would sleep on the floor next to the bed in the living room where Jason slept. Indian country was defined as all reservation land, all dependent Indian communities, and all Indian allotments. A court must interpret a statute so as to uphold its constitutionality if reasonably possible. Defendant argued the child was unavailable for cross-examination regarding her statements to the DCFS investigator because defendant would have been forced to first elicit the damaging testimony from [the child] and then attempt to refute it. Garcia-Cordova, 392 Ill. App. We continue to adhere to this courts prior precedent and find section 115 10 of the Code (725 ILCS 5/115 10 (West 2006)) facially constitutional. The jury could have found R.Ks videotaped statement more complete and trustworthy than her trial testimony, given its proximity *267in time to the incident. Donec aliquet. 3d 947, 909 N.E.2d 971 (2009); People v. Bryant, 391 Ill. App. 3d 467, 469, 727 N.E.2d 404, 406 (2000). [fn 13][53], Solicitor General Ted Olson argued that Congress, in response to the Duro decision, acted to "recognize and affirm" the Indian tribe's inherent power to enforce its criminal laws against Indians of other tribes. CRIM 211 Midterm Study Guide.docx - Midterm Study Guide slept, he put his finger into her vagina as far as his fingernail, and then J.O. The trial court sentenced him to terms of 10 years and 8 years in prison, with the sentences to run consecutively. Two middle school girls plotted to kill their teacher with poison.docx "[105] Thomas further questioned the law[106] ending the practice of making treaties with the tribes, noting that this was the one clear constitutional provision that provides for dealing with other sovereigns. [91] He did note that "we are not now faced with a question dealing with potential constitutional limits on congressional efforts to legislate far more radical changes in tribal status. Michael J. Pelletier, Deputy Defender, Office of the State Appellate Defender (Megan E. Ledbetter, of counsel), for DefendantAppellant.Anita Alvarez, State's Attorney, State's Attorney of Cook County (Alan J. Spellberg, Ashley A. Romito, Jessica R. Ball, of counsel), for PlaintiffAppellee. Decided June 20, 1983. About; License; Lawyer Directory; Projects. into a bedroom and asked her if Phillip had ever touched her in a way that made her uncomfortable. Question (1) Is a police officer's good faith reliance on a third party's apparent authority to consent to a search a valid exception to the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment? Fusce dui lectus, congue vel laoreet ac, dictum vitae odio. She testified most of the time, she did not leave the children alone with defendant. His confession was admitted into evidence; the girl gave statements and testified at trial. Carey Kato, a forensic interviewer working for the Children's Advocacy Center, interviewed J.O. When asked how many times defendant had touched her bottom body, she said 100., When asked by the State, Did he touch you with anything else beside his hand, R.K. answered, No. She said she told defendant to quit it when he touched her. As we stated earlier, Luckey asked open-ended questions, to which R.K. responded. Judge Presiding Date of Appeal: Nov. 13, 2012 Date of Judgment: Oct. 17, 2012 OPENING BRIEF OF DEFENDANT-APPELLANT Steven B. Muslin Craig M. Sandberg MUSLIN & SANDBERG 19 S. LaSalle Street, Suite 700 . Docket No. Kathleen called the Child Advocacy Center, which referred her to the Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) and the police. In Kitch, this court recently adhered to its previous ruling in Reed and rejected the defendants contention section 115 10 is facially unconstitutional. J.O. 3d at 480, 912 N.E.2d at 291. Crow Dog was ordered released, having made restitution under tribal law to Spotted Tail's family. It is not the function of this court to second-guess the credibility determinations of the trier of fact unless we determine no reasonable jury could have come to that same conclusion. Jason Lara, was found guilty of two counts of, predatory criminal sexual assault for inserting his finger into the vagina of an eight-, year-old girl. 2d 177, 124 S. Ct. 1354 (2004). Defendant contends his counsel would have had to ask her to admit she made the statement to Officer Luckey, thereby implicating defendant. Defense counsel chose to limit his cross-examination of R.K. Defense counsel did not ask her any questions about the alleged incident or any other incidents of inappropriate contact. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google. Augustina began dating John Cordero after she separated from her husband, Phillip A., who was C.A. Fusce dui lectus, congue vel laoreet ac, dictum vitae odio. Nam risus ante, dapibus a molestie consequat, ultrices ac magna. When asked what she called the part to which she pointed, she said [bjottom body. R.K. testified it was on the front of her body and that defendant had touched her on that part of her body. R.K. testified defendant would stand and look at her when he was not touching her. to Cordero's home, before school. 's out-of-court statements; (2) the court failed to comply with Supreme Court Rule 431(b) concerning admonitions to jurors; (3) the evidence proved the corpus delicti only for ACSA, and not for PCSA; (4) the trial court should have instructed the jury in accord with the requirements of section 11510(c) of the Code; (5) the trial court should have instructed the jury on the lesser-included offense of ACSA; and (6) the trial court imposed an excessive sentence. It reduced them to the lesser-included offenses of aggravated criminal sexual abuse and remanded for resentencing. Donec aliquet. and C.A. Indians are very integrated across tribal boundaries, intermarrying across tribes and sharing child and medical care services across tribes. [126] As Justice Souter stated in his dissent, this remains "an area peculiarly susceptible to confusion. The parties stipulated that in January 2005 Jason was 19 years old. He petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus to the Supreme Court, and in Ex parte Crow Dog[10] the Supreme Court found that the federal government did not have jurisdiction to try the case. Touching for a five-year-old is done with fingers and hands. 3d at 1081, 909 N.E.2d at 400. In July 2008, a hearing was held on R.K.s out-of-court statement. Further, an attorney surely does not want to elicit an answer that will implicate his client. At the time of the offense, R.K. was 5 years old (born September 16, 2002) and defendant was 25 years old. ", This page was last edited on 4 October 2022, at 14:40. Pellentesque dapibus efficitur laoreet.
sectetur adip
sectetur adipiscing elit. Pellentesque dapibus effic
sectetur adipiscing elit. 3d 108, 114, 915 N.E.2d 29, 34 (2009), appeal allowed, 233 Ill. 2d 581, 919 N.E.2d 360 (2009), quoting Reed, 361 Ill. App. In this case, R.K. was present, she answered all of the questions posed by defense counsel, and nothing in the record indicates she would not have answered any other questions defense counsel could have asked. Glaub observed Luckeys interview of R.K. Glaub testified there was no indication R.K. had *264been coached. On appeal, he argued that the Agustina P. had two children, J.O and C.A, who would often stay with Shelley Lara, , 2005, J.O told Cordero Jason had touched her inappropriately, and. The judge did not ask the jurors about the defendant's lack of a duty to present evidence or the right not to testify. woke up. [82], These powers included the ability to both restrict tribal powers or to relax such restrictions. was excessive. [115], Souter wrote that this dissonance in court decisions will lead to confusion, stating: "And confusion, I fear, will be the legacy of today's decision, for our failure to stand by what we have previously said reveals that our conceptualizations of sovereignty and dependent sovereignty are largely rhetorical. Case Brief 1.docx - Brewer v. Williams 430 U.S. 387 1977 The Parties: 5th Judicial District Court Polk County Iowa Defendant Robert Case Brief 1.docx - Brewer v. Williams 430 U.S. 387 1977 . She further noted that another circuit court had ruled the same way. The following morning, Augustina asked Cordero to talk to J.O. Question 14 Which of the following statements is NOT correct? Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. at 160, 459 N.W.2d at 531. View [49] This meant that double jeopardy attached. Defendants argument is similar to an argument made by the defendant in People v. Garcia-Cordova, 392 Ill. App. For the reasons stated, we affirm defendants conviction. Augustina, Cordero and Paraday repeated the testimony they gave at the pretrial hearing. An assistant State's Attorney read to the jury the handwritten statement Jason signed. 3d at 1094, 909 N.E.2d at 409-10. Illinois v. Lara Case Brief.docx - Illinois v. Lara 2012 IL Nam lacinia pulvinar tortor nec facilisis. The court found the interview contained sufficient safeguards of reliability. The following morning, Augustina asked Cordero to talk to J.O. On appeal, the Illinois Supreme Court did not agree with the appellate court on the He was assigned to investigate the allegations involving R.K. Glaub also testified he requested a physical exam of R.K. be performed. this rule required the State to produce independent evidence of the elements of penetration The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, PlaintiffAppellee, [408 Ill.App.3d 733] A jury found the defendant, Jason Lara, guilty of two counts of predatory criminal sexual assault (PCSA) for inserting his finger into the vagina of an eight-year-old girl, J.O. Nam risus ante, dapibus a molestie consequat, ultrices ac magna. [21] In 1991, Congress amended the Indian Civil Rights Act[22] (ICRA) to recognize that Indian tribes had inherent power to exercise criminal jurisdiction over all Indians. School University of North Carolina, Pembroke Course Title CRJ 3000 Uploaded By ConstableComputerWaterBuffalo2326 Pages 2 Ratings 100% (3) to give the answers she gave, and therefore, the statements were sufficiently reliable for admission into evidence under section 11510 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) (725 ILCS 5/11510(a), (b) (West 2008)). Nothing about her trial testimony rendered her prior statement unreliable. Lara Annotate this Case Justia Opinion Summary Defendant was convicted of two counts of predatory criminal sexual assault on an eight-year-old girl, at his mother's home for babysitting, on two dates. The following year, Congress passed a law that stated that Indian tribes, because of their inherent sovereignty, had the authority to try non-member Indians for crimes committed within the tribe's territorial jurisdiction. Which is also called penal law. How was this most difficult challenge affected by other demands and challenges that confronted the first, Over the last century, America has produced two dominant and nearly opposite myths of its early explorers: the noble, courageous bringer of light and civilization to the barbarous world; and (more. and C.A. Augustina P. had 2 children. She did not tell her mother or Shelley about either incident because she thought she would get in trouble. At the trial, J.O. CRIM 211 Criminal Law - Ivy Tech Community College, Indianapolis The indictment alleged defendant placed his mouth on R.K.s vagina. J.O. Case Situation: The defendant, Jason Lara was found guilty of 2 counts of predatory criminal sexual assault against an eight-year-old girl, J.O. Before trial, the prosecution filed a motion seeking to admit at trial testimony about the statements J.O. Defendant also argues the trial court should have reversed its pretrial ruling after R.K. testified at the trial because the contradictions between her testimony and her recorded interview rendered the interview unreliable. Kathleens bedroom was on the second floor. Determinations of the credibility of witnesses, the weight to be given their testimony, and reasonable inferences to be drawn from the evidence lie in the province of the trier of fact, here the jury. In June 2008, a grand jury indicted defendant, charging him with predatory criminal sexual assault for committing an act of sexual *260penetration on R.K. between July 13, 2007, and May 7, 2008. [45] The panel then affirmed the trial court on the Petite claim. Press escape to return to last selected case text. delicti. When asked why she told her mom, R.K. responded, Because he was doing something wrong.. No. According to the written statement, he said that on the first occasion, while J.O. Nam lacinia pulvinar tortor nec facilisis. Since we find R.K. was available for cross-examination, trial counsels performance was not deficient. How much output does the Unlock every step-by-step explanation, download literature note PDFs, plus more. Criminal liability 8. Paraday admitted that when Kato interviewed J.O., J.O. [fn 9] Soon after, federal prosecutors charged Lara with assault on a federal officer[32] and a federal grand jury indicted him. [87] The earlier decisions in Duro, Wheeler, and Oliphant dealt with cases where Congress had restricted a tribe's inherent powers but pointed at nothing in the Constitution or established precedent that prohibits Congress from relaxing such restrictions. Thus, the trial court did not err in denying defendants motion to reconsider its earlier ruling to admit the recorded interview. Explain the positive contributions of firms to society. Defendant argues his trial counsel was ineffective because he did not argue R.K. was unavailable as a witness and her videotaped statement was therefore inadmissible. An attorney is not required to, and indeed should not, make an argument not well-grounded in fact or law. Levels and degrees of crime, differences between misdemeanor and felony 4. 3d 468, 912 N.E.2d 280 (2009). 3d at 480, 912 N.E.2d at 291. People v. Lara :: 2011 :: Illinois Appellate Court, First District ANS: The textbook defines criminal law as the body of rules and regulations that defines and specifies punishments for offenses of a public nature or for wrongs committed against the state or society. You're all set! After the arrest, Jason spent some hours locked in a cell. evidence corroborating every element of the charged offenses before a defendants statement i Fourth Amendment . Illinois v. Lafayette. The court stated cross-examination on these topics could be considered friendly cross-examination. Garcia-Cordova, 392 Ill. App. [fn 8][30] Lara pleaded guilty to the tribal charge of "violence to a policeman". [78], Breyer stated that the Indian Commerce Clause[79] of the United States Constitution granted Congress "plenary and exclusive" power to legislate in respect to the Indian tribes. At trial, he denied any inappropriate behavior. Sometimes J.O. All Documents are available in pdf format. consecutive terms of 10 and 8 years. CRIM 361 Chapter 3 (Question for Discussion).docx, Unformatted text preview: ISSUES Is Laras sole confession of PCSA enough to convict him on two counts regardless of insufficient evidence of corpus delicti? Full Document. Fusce dui lectus, congue vel laoreet ac, dictum vitae odio. When determining the constitutionality of a statute, courts presume the statute is constitutional. The doctor had no opinion as to whether Jason suffered a seizure on the day of the arrest. Defendant argues RK.s recorded statement contains inconsistencies, contradictions, and most of the detail in the interview came after *268prodding by Officer Luckey. Not yet answered Select one: Marked out of O a. Accordi . Defendant also argues the trial court abused its discretion by allowing R.K.s videotaped statement to be shown to the jury. [408 Ill.App.3d 736] The court instructed the jurors that when they considered the testimony of any witness, they could take into account the witness's, ability and opportunity to observe, his memory, his manner while testifying, any interest, bias or prejudice he may have, and the reasonableness of his testimony considered in the light of all the evidence in the case.. 3d at 1000, 838 N.E.2d at 333. testified that for the first incident, while she slept, she felt Jason's hand inside her pants, touching her vagina. Nam lacinia pulvinar tortor nec facilisis. Rolandis G., 232 Ill. 2d at 33, 902 N.E.2d at 611. Augustina came into the bedroom to talk to J.O., and again J.O. GarciaCordova, 392 Ill. App. Module 6: Ch'l4 Homework 6 a Saved Help Save & Exil. Sign up for our free summaries and get the latest delivered directly to you. interpretation of the corpus delicti rule, holding that the State need not present independent United States v. Lara, 541 U.S. 193 (2004), was a United States Supreme Court landmark case [1] which held that both the United States and a Native American (Indian) tribe could prosecute an Indian for the same acts that constituted crimes in both jurisdictions. stated defendant placed his mouth on her sex organ and licked inside her pee pee. A reasonable jury could properly have found RK.s statement credible. Glaub testified he did not ask Tim K. about his relationship with defendant. At the hearing, Officer Luckey testified he had been a police officer for 20 years. In Justice Thomas's conclusion at the end of this case, he stated, "History points in both directions. slept at Shelley's home, where Shelley's son, Jason, also slept. Jason signed a statement about the incident later that day. Nam lacinia pulvinar tortor nec facilisis. 720 ILCS 5/12 14.1(a)(1) (West 2006). Subscribers can access the reported version of this case. 3d at 1000, 838 N.E.2d at 333. The jurors were each provided a transcript of the videotaped statement while the videotape was played for the jury. The trial court found that [408 Ill.App.3d 735] the questions did not effectively coach J.O. As part of our judgment, we grant the State its $50 statutory assessment against defendant as costs of this appeal. Paraday admitted that when Kato interviewed J.O., J.O. 1st Dist. Shelley and Jason came to Cordero's home. She pushed his hand away and went back to sleep. In fact, Glaub stated R.K. said no one told her what to say. The judge did not ask the jurors about the defendant's lack of a duty to present evidence or the right not to testify. Pellentesque dapibus e
sectetur adipiscing elit. 1-09-1326. Nam lacinia pulvinar tortor nec facilisis. He was the only individual in the room with R.K., but the interview was both audio- and video-recorded. He argues (1) the trial court should have excluded the testimony about J.O. The State called R.K. as a witness. [77] He noted that the intent of Congress was clear, not only based on the plain language of the statute, but also from its legislative history. Neither the State nor defendant specifically asked R.K. whether defendant put his mouth or tongue on her vagina. and C.A., who has a friend, Shelley Lara, that provides childcare often as she works evenings. She pushed his hand away and went back to sleep. [fn 16], Alexander F. Reichert was appointed by the Supreme Court to argue the case for Lara. A doctor testified that Jason suffered from epilepsy, and at the time of the arrest, medications did not adequately control his condition. [8] In 1872, the Sisseton and Wahpeton bands of the Santee signed a treaty that resulted in their moving to the Spirit Lake Reservation. After several incidents of serious misconduct, the Spirit Lake Tribe issued an order excluding him from the reservation. Since separate sovereign bodies had filed the charges, double jeopardy did not apply to Lara's case. He did not recall much about the statement he signed at the station. [67] Lara argued that since the tribe had no such inherent sovereignty, it could only prosecute a non-member Indian based upon federal sovereignty, which would make a subsequent Federal prosecution a violation of the prohibition of double jeopardy. defendant, Lara, was charged with predatory criminal sexual assault; he was, convicted; he appealed his conviction to the Illinois Court of Appeals citing corpus. Harvard asserts no copyright in caselaw retrieved from this site. 2d 674, 104 S. Ct. 2052 (1984). R.K. described conduct with which a typical four- or five-year-old child would not and should not be familiar. He testified he had received special training on how to interview children who are victims of sexual abuse or severe physical abuse. Defendant had the opportunity to cross-examine the victim in this case, and she answered all of his questions. 3d at 484, 912 N.E.2d at 294. She was never asked this specific question by either the State or defendant.
Portland To South Australia Border,
What I Wish I Had In My Divorce Decree,
Breaker Breaker 19 Smokey And The Bandit,
Articles I