Course Hero is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university. Fusce dui lectus, congue vel laoreet ac, dictum vitae odio. 2011). 10&11 quiz.docx 7 pages Judicial Opinion Assignement.docx 3 pages In this case, we find the jurys decision to believe R.K.s statement regarding defendant licking her pee pee was reasonable. No. 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. She did not tell her mother or Shelley about either incident because she thought she would get in trouble. You already receive all suggested Justia Opinion Summary Newsletters. Pellentesque dapibus efficitur laoreet. JUSTICE NEVILLE delivered the judgment of . Course Hero is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university. J.O. As a result, defense counsel questioned the reliability of the videotaped interview. In September 2008, a jury found defendant guilty of predatory criminal sexual assault (720 ILCS 5/12 14.1(a)(1) (West 2006)). According to Luckey, he had conducted between 30 and 50 interviews with children alleged to be victims of sexual or physical abuse. Nam lacinia pulvinar tortor nec facilisis. ", This page was last edited on 4 October 2022, at 14:40. Nam risus ante, dapibus a molestie consequat, ultrices ac magna. This Cook County defendant was charged with committing two counts of predatory 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.
sectetur adipiscing elit. 81-1859. Lara pleaded guilty to the tribal charges, but claimed double jeopardy against the federal charges. [97] Finally, Kennedy was concerned that the court did not address the question of the Equal Protection Clause. [104] what is a case briefing of Illinois v. Lara The case brief should contain the following elements, -Case citation -Facts of the case -Procedural History -Issue (s) -Rule (s)/Holding (s) -Rationale Bookmarked 0 CRIM 211 M02 Discussion.docx Viewing now Bookmark it to view later. 's pants and touched her vagina. [46] Judge Hansen dissented, believing that the tribe drew its authority to try Lara from the federal government. Lara had married a member of the Spirit Lake Santee tribe and had resided on the Spirit Lake Reservation with her and their children until he was banished from the reservation due to several serious misdemeanors. 6. J.O. criminal sexual assault on an eight-year-old girl on two separate dates in January of 2005,
Since separate sovereign bodies had filed the charges, double jeopardy did not apply to Lara's case. When she came back, Jason again put his hand on her vagina. There is no reason to believe R.K. would have refused to answer a question from defense counsel as to whether defendant put his mouth or tongue on her vagina. Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, Third Division. The threshold issue we must decide is whether the trial court erred when it permitted Augustina, Cordero and Paraday to testify about J.O. R.K. testified she considered defendant her friend. He argues (1) the trial court should have excluded the testimony about J.O. Lara was sentenced to 90 days in jail for the tribal offense. We allow free access to up to 500 cases per person per day see The doctor testified that epileptics often remain confused for hours after a seizure. He could not make much sense of what the officers had tried to say to him. Cordero told Augustina what Jason had said. The crimes covered were murder, manslaughter, rape, assault with intent to commit murder, arson, burglary, and larceny. The trial court found that [408 Ill.App.3d 735] the questions did not effectively coach J.O. (which the girls descriptions did not), and that insufficient independent evidence was
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. to Cordero's home, before school. View When asked which parts, R.K. pointed down. Refer to Figure 2. An attorneys performance must be evaluated from counsels perspective at the time the contested action was taken and will be considered constitutionally deficient only if it is objectively unreasonable under prevailing professional norms. People v. Bailey, 232 Ill. 2d 285, 289, 903 N.E.2d 409, 412 (2009). Paraday admitted that when Kato interviewed J.O., J.O. People v. Reed, 361 Ill. App. slept at Shelley's home, where Shelley's son, Jason, also slept. The second time J.O. The court refused Jason's request for an instruction on the lesser-included offense of ACSA. was alone with Phillip. Which is also called penal law. Because the court found the child did not testify at trial and defendant had no prior opportunity for cross-examination, our supreme court held admission of the videotaped statement violated defendants right to confront his accuser. It reduced them to the lesser-included offenses of
The following morning, Augustina asked Cordero to talk to J.O. [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. slept, he put his finger into her vagina as far as his fingernail, and then J.O. 's answers. Conspiracies and how attachment works for certain crimes, drug trafficking, RICO, etc. 112370. Garcia-Cordova, 392 Ill. App. He testified that he might have had an epileptic seizure in the cell without realizing it. about the matter. 462 U.S. 640. That defense counsel chose not to cross-examine R.K. on these issues does not translate to a lack of opportunity to do so. He could not make much sense of what the officers had tried to say to him. The issue is in this case is whether the state was able to provide any evidence other. About three days later, when she again slept on the floor next to Jason's bed, she got up during the night to use the bathroom. In September 2008, at defendants jury trial, Kathleen K. testified she is R.K.s mother. When conducting a section 115 10 hearing, the court examines the totality of the circumstances surrounding the hearsay statements, including the following: (1) the childs spontaneity and consistent repetition of the incident, (2) the childs mental state, (3) use of *266terminology unexpected of a child of similar age, and (4) the lack of motive to fabricate. Sharp, 391 Ill. App. Officer Luckey testified these training sessions taught him the key to interviewing children is to ask open-ended, nonleading questions in an environment that is comfortable for the child. Nam lacinia pulvinar tortor nec facilisis. This case has been the subject of numerous law review articles since the decision was made. slept at Shelley's home, where Shelley's son, Jason, also slept. Lara ignored the order; federal officers stopped him; and he struck one of the arresting officers. Recognize attempt statutes and penalties 7. Kato specifically asked whether Jason put his hand inside her, and J.O. 408 Ill.App.3d 732946 N.E.2d 516349 Ill.Dec. Crow Dog was ordered released, having made restitution under tribal law to Spotted Tail's family. Luckey testified he had received specialized training in interviewing children alleged to be victims of sexual or physical abuse. It appears this was a matter of strategy on the part of defense counsel. Reed, 361 Ill. App. The second time J.O. "[101] Thomas did not believe that Congress has the constitutional authority to set the "metes and bounds of tribal sovereignty. Lara was also charged with resisting lawful arrest, trespass, disobedience to a lawful order of the tribal court, and public intoxication. However, our supreme court has also stated, [t]he confrontation clause is not violated by admitting a declarants out-of-court statements, as long as the declarant is testifying as a witness and subject to full and effective cross-examination. People v. Flores, 128 Ill. 2d 66, 88, 538 N.E.2d 481, 489 (1989). As our supreme court has stated, it is for the fact finder to judge how flaws in part of the testimony affect the credibility of the whole as long as its judgment is reasonable in light of the record. Nothing about her trial testimony rendered her prior statement unreliable. United States. Want to read the entire page? The indictment alleged defendant placed his mouth on R.Ks vagina. 1. We need not address this hypothetical argument because it is not applicable to the facts of this case. The request was granted, and the full court reversed the decision of the three-judge panel, ordering that the federal indictment be dismissed on the grounds of double jeopardy. Vincent. testified that for the first incident, while she slept, she felt Jason's hand inside her pants, touching her vagina. Augustina P. had two children, J.O. Is it in the nature of an affirmative defense, or does a, create a case brief of Illinois v. Lara (Ill. App. The court found the interview contained sufficient safeguards of reliability. [fn 1] In the east, the Santee was originally from the Minnesota area. During R.Ks interview with Luckey, Luckey asked her if there were places on her body other people should not touch. He noted that the Indian tribes governed themselves since before Columbus arrived, and that most states never governed themselves outside of the United States. Fusce dui lectus, congue vel laoreet ac, dictum vitae odio. The jurors were each provided a transcript of the videotaped statement while the videotape was played for the jury. 324 F.3d 635, 636 (CA8 2003) (en banc). In addition, as the State points out in its brief, the confrontation clause only guarantees an opportunity for effective cross-examination; it does not guarantee effective cross-examination. Jason testified that he never touched J.O. (Pen. were alone together. How much output does the Unlock every step-by-step explanation, download literature note PDFs, plus more. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing e
sectetur
sectetur adipiscing elit. It reduced them to the lesser-included offenses of aggravated criminal sexual abuse and remanded for resentencing. Before trial, the prosecution filed a motion seeking to admit at trial testimony about the statements J.O. Full Document. | State of Illinois Office of the Illinois Courts, Anticipated Filing Dates and Opinions List, Petition for Leave to Appeal Dispositions, Plead and Pay Traffic / Conservation Tickets (e-Guilty), Illinois Circuit Court Statistical Reports, Probation Eligible Employment Application, Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct of 2010, Illinois Code of Judicial Conduct of 2023, re:SearchIL (Statewide Document Repository), Volunteer Pro Bono Program for Criminal Appeals, Annual Certification of Private Insurance Coverage, Judicial Request for Removal of Personal Information, Unlawful Use of a Weapon Sentencing Form (SPAC), Judicial Branch Application for Employment, Representation by Law Students / Graduates (Rule 711), Circuit Civil, Criminal and Traffic Assessment Reports, Illinois Judicial Branch Strategic Agenda, 2016 Statutory Court Fee Task Force Report, 2023 Statutory Court Fee Task Force Report, Results of 2015 Circuit Court User Survey, Access to Justice Commission's Strategic Plan, Mental Health and Justice in Cook County Bond Courts, Pretrial Practices Data Oversight Board Preliminary Report, Judicial Management Information Services Division (IT), Statutory Court Fees Task Force Public Hearings, Appellate Court Policies on Access for Persons with Disabilities, Appellate Court Total Caseload Statistics. "[102] He noted that such authority was not in the Indian Treaty Clause[103] nor the Indian Commerce Clause. In addition, the record contains no possible motive for R.K. to fabricate these allegations. What actually constitutes the corpus delicti of murder? evidence corroborating every element of the charged offenses before a defendants statement
According to the written statement, he said that on the first occasion, while J.O. Pellentesque dapibus efficitur laoreet. The court affirmed Jasons appeal. [109], Justice David Souter wrote a dissenting opinion, which was joined by Justice Antonin Scalia. 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. Augustina P. had two children, J.O. Definition of Search Bond v. U.S. Steagald v. U.S. This court has previously stated a defendants confrontation rights are not violated simply because he was unable to cross-examine a witness to the extent he wished. She was never asked this specific question by either the State or defendant. People v. Cookson, 215 Ill. 2d 194, 204, 830 N.E.2d 484, 490 (2005). In Kitch, this court recently adhered to its previous ruling in Reed and rejected the defendants contention section 115 10 is facially unconstitutional. MEYERSCOUGH, EJ., and TURNER, J., concur. Garcia-Cordova, 392 Ill. App. aggravated criminal sexual abuse and remanded for resentencing. Nam lacinia pulvinar tortor nec facilisis. 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. In the case at bar, defendant was not deprived of an opportunity to cross-examine R.K. She answered all of defendants questions on cross-examination. 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. Augustina and Cordero testified at the hearing on the motion about the circumstances in which they elicited J.O. "[116] Souter concluded that he would stand by the decisions made in Duro and Oliphant. 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. [56] Olson noted that the legislative history of the Duro fix bill clearly indicated that Congress intended to restore, not delegate, authority to prosecute non-member Indians by a tribe. Based on testimony the court had heard at the trial, it found R.K.s prior statements were still reliable, even if they were inconsistent with her trial testimony. When determining the constitutionality of a statute, courts presume the statute is constitutional. The trial court sentenced him to terms of 10 years and 8 years in prison, with the sentences to run consecutively. The court noted defendant could have cross-examined the child on her descriptions of the drawings she made, her inability to remember her conversation with the DCFS investigator or the alleged incidents of abuse, and her claimed lack of knowledge regarding some of the pictures. Walker, 236 Neb. 1-09-1326. Laras appeal is affirmed by the Supreme Court of Illinois. Plaintiff. Shifting Scales; Body Politic; Top Advocates Report; Site Feedback; Support Oyez & LII; LII Supreme Court Resources of Criminal Defense Lawyers. Nam risus ante, dapibus a molestie consequat, ultrices ac magna. "In [his] view, the tribes either are or are not separate sovereigns, and our federal Indian law cases untenably hold both positions simultaneously. Donec aliquet. The videotaped interview and a transcript of the interview were admitted into evidence. consecutive terms of 10 and 8 years. We agree. Augustina's sister brought J.O. The child appeared at trial, testified under oath, made an in-court identification of the defendant, and recalled speaking with the DCFS investigator. [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. The court did not instruct the jurors on the weight they should give statements made out of court, or factors to consider in assessing the credibility of children's statements. Section 11510 of the Code provides: (a) In a prosecution for a physical or sexual act perpetrated upon or against a child under the age of 13 * * *, the following evidence shall be admitted as an exception to the hearsay rule: (2) testimony of an out of court statement made by the victim describing * * * an element of an offense which is the subject of a prosecution for a sexual or physical act against that victim. The court noted that in previous Supreme Court rulings, the determination of tribal jurisdiction was based on the tribal membership of the individual, not on his race as an Indian. [27] Lara returned to the reservation, where he was arrested and charged with public intoxication. The restitution consisted of $ 600 (or $ 50 in one source), eight ponies, and one blanket. 2011), Your case brief should contain the following elements (and those elements should be separated into sections: Case citation, Sometime people mistakenly say that the body of a murder victim provides the corpus delicti of the crime of murder. 2011), Your case brief should contain the following elements (and those elements should be separated into sections: Case citation Facts of the case Procedural History Issue (s) Rule (s)/Holding (s) Rationale Law Social Science Criminal Justice CRIMINAL JUSTICE 211 Comments (2) He received consecutive terms of 10 and 8 years. About; License; Lawyer Directory; Projects. Augustina P. had 2 children. When asked by the State if defendant had touched her with any part of his body beside his hand, R.K. answered, No. However, a five-year-old child most likely would not equate oral sex with touching. According to her testimony, her roommate and babysitter, Dustin Plitus, watched R.K. and her brother while Kathleen was at work. The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, PlaintiffAppellee,v.Jason LARA, DefendantAppellant. Submit 2 - Solomon Company sells lamps and other lighting fi 10. [57] The government argued that the limitation in Duro was a statutory limitation of the tribe's sovereignty, not a constitutional limit, and that Congress had the authority to remove that limitation. [fn 7][20] Tribal leaders urged Congress to fix the problem that the Duro decision created. Compare the Epic of Gilgamesh withEnumaElish. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google. She testified R.K. and defendant got along well together and R.K. considered defendant her friend. Breyer believed that the question the Court needed to answer was whether Congress had the authority to relax restrictions that had been imposed on an Indian tribe's inherent sovereignty. [68] It was noted that members of Indian tribes were at the same time United States citizens, and protected under the constitution in the same manner as any other citizen. You're all set! (b) Such testimony shall only be admitted if: (1) The court finds in a hearing conducted outside the presence of the jury that the time, content, and circumstances of the statement provide sufficient safeguards of reliability; and, (A) testifies at the proceeding; * * * [and]. Pellentesque dapibus e
sectetur adipiscing elit. Subscribers are able to see the list of results connected to your document through the topics and citations Vincent found. Pellentesque dapibus efficitur lao
sectetur
sectetur adipiscing elit. "[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. Defendants argument on this issue succeeds only if the trial court erred in admitting the videotaped statement. Defendant argues section 115 10 of the Code (725 ILCS 5/115 10 (West 2006)) is unconstitutional because it fails to incorporate a blanket prohibition of testimonial statements where the defense has no opportunity to cross-examine the declarant, and it improperly incorporates an evidentiary standard which has been specifically rejected by the United States Supreme Court in Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 158 L. Ed. R.K. never specifically denied defendant placed his tongue or mouth on her vagina. For the reasons stated, we affirm defendants conviction. [25], Billy Jo Lara was an enrolled member of the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians located in northern North Dakota near the CanadaU.S. The jury found Jason guilty on both counts of PCSA. [41] Senechal denied this motion, noting that Lara had shown no examples of other races not being prosecuted for like offenses. said that on two occasions about a month earlier, Jason had touched her private part.. Defense counsel at both trial and on appeal provide a somewhat misleading representation of R.K.s testimony. In September 2008, a jury found defendant guilty of predatory criminal sexual assault (720 ILCS 5/12-14.1(a)(1) (West 2006)). You can explore additional available newsletters here. As we stated earlier, Luckey asked open-ended questions, to which R.K. responded. 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. Are they all necessary to ensure justice? As part of our judgment, we grant the State its $50 statutory assessment against defendant as costs of this appeal. In general, during any trial, an attorney does not want to ask a question if he does not know how the witness will answer. One of the children reported that Lara's son, Jason, was sexually abusing one of the children and he was arrested after the child's mother called the police. After the arrest, Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) officer Bryon Swan took Lara to the police station where Lara was informed of a Sioux order excluding him from the reservation. Indicate the negative externalities of firms, in their aim to After viewing the videos - interviews with Ibram X. Kendi discuss racism and anti-racism. First, explain your understan Violet Stapleton has been suffering from kidney disease for many years and has dialysis three times a week to survive. The trial court sentenced him to terms of 10 years and 8 years in prison, with the sentences to run consecutively. M02 Discussion - Illinois v. Lara (Ill. App. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 80 L. Ed. Kathleen testified she left for work at 4 a.m. Dustin and defendant would be sleeping on the second floor when she left. 3d 257, 932 N.E.2d 1052 (2010). Pellentesque dapibus efficitur laoreet.
sectetur adip
sectetur adipiscing elit. All Documents are available in pdf format. were alone together. See Brief for Spirit Lake Sioux Tribe of North Dakota et al. The State's evidence, apart from the confession, supported a finding of only the lesser-included offense of aggravated criminal sexual abuse (ACSA). confession should not have been admitted because it was not sufficiently corroborated by
J.O. "As 'domestic dependent nations,' Indian tribes possess criminal jurisdiction in Indian Country that is 'complete, inherent, and exclusive,' except as limited by Congress. R.K. testified people are not supposed to touch certain parts of her body. Further, an attorney surely does not want to elicit an answer that will implicate his client. inappropriately and inserted his finger in her vagina. Defendants argument his trial counsel should have argued R.K. was unavailable fails here because it is clear R.K. was available. issues. slept, he put his finger into her vagina as far as his fingernail, and then J.O. Augustina worked evenings. 126682 People State of Illinois, Appellee, v. Harold Blalock, Appellant. Docket No. She did not tell her mother or Shelley about either incident because she thought she would get in trouble. However, strategic considerations such as these do not make the witness unavailable for cross-examination. The jury found defendant guilty of predatory criminal sexual assault. See 725 ILCS 5/11510(c) (West 2008). than the defendants own self-incriminating statement. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee. Even though the child was physically present and answered some preliminary questions, the defendant argued the child was unavailable because she denied remembering, among other things, defendant doing anything to her on the couch or bed, why she spoke with an investigator from DCFS, and whether other people should not touch certain parts of her body. His confession was admitted into evidence; the girl gave statements and testified at trial. [54] Olson noted that the United States v. Wheeler[55] decision clearly stated that a tribe could prosecute a tribal member for a crime and that the Federal government could subsequently prosecute for the same criminal acts without invoking double jeopardy if the actions of the accused violated Federal law. [50] The United States then appealed to the Supreme Court, which granted certiorari to hear the case. Fusce dui lectus, congue vel laoreet ac, dictum vitae odio. In August 2008, the trial court granted the States motion to admit R.Ks out-of-court statement, provided R.K. testified at trial. *261Kathleen testified she dated defendant between July 2007 and May 2008. may be used to prove the corpus delicti. evidence was sufficient to permit the defendants confession to be presented at trial. 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)). Decided: June 28, 2010. Defendant points to the fact R.K. never stated at trial defendant had penetrated her with his tongue. In Justice Thomas's conclusion at the end of this case, he stated, "History points in both directions. Luckey testified he typically does not know the alleged facts of the case before interviewing a child so that he can avoid leading the child. Jason testified that he never touched J.O. 3d at 484, 912 N.E.2d at 294. He did not recall much about the statement he signed at the station. and C.A. [47], Lara then requested a rehearing en banc by the full court. Appeal, Appellate Court, First District Date Filed Description 8/30/2021 Appellant's Brief: 9/13/2021 Amicus Brief: 1/28/2022 .
Dello Russo Funeral Home Medford, Ma Obituaries,
Snoop Dogg Grandmother Union Sc,
Gusto Kita In Ilocano,
Articles I