2013 IL App (1st) 122333
FIFTH DIVISION
NOVEMBER 8, 2013
No. 1-12-2333
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) Appeal from the
) Circuit Court of
Plaintiff-Appellee, ) Cook County.
)
v. ) No. 11 CR 10475
)
SABER DAHEYA, ) Honorable
) Larry G. Axelrood,
Defendant-Appellant. ) Judge Presiding.
PRESIDING JUSTICE GORDON delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion.
Justices Palmer and Taylor concurred in the judgment and opinion.
OPINION
¶1 Following a bench trial, defendant Saber Daheya was convicted of four counts of
aggravated discharge of a firearm and sentenced to seven years in the Illinois Department of
Corrections. 720 ILCS 5/24-1.2(a)(2) (West 2008). At trial, three eyewitnesses, Jermaine Fox,
Fox’s girlfriend Amanda Padilla, and Ndeyiah Corneh, testified that, on June 14, 2011, they were
traveling in a minivan near Jensen Park in Chicago when they observed defendant running
toward their vehicle aiming a handgun and heard four shots being fired. Fox and Padilla testified
that defendant was a member of the Conservative Vice Lords street gang, which was a hostile
rival to the gang that Fox was associated with, the Simon City Royals.1 Fox and Padilla also
testified that Christian Ramos and Zay Russell were with defendant at the time of the shooting;
1
As the trial court noted, the issue of gang membership is an “amorphous” concept, since
the eyewitnesses distinguished between gang membership and gang affiliation, while personally
denying any current association with gangs.
No. 1-12-2333
however, Ramos testified that he was in school that evening and the parties stipulated that
Russell was not present because he was incarcerated. Responding police officer John Geisbush
testified that he recovered four bullet shell casings at the scene of the crime, though he did not
discover any property damage to nearby residences or vehicles.
¶2 A fourth eyewitness, Jessica Palmer, signed a handwritten statement for the police that
stated that she observed defendant running toward the vehicle holding his waistband moments
before she heard gunshots, but she recanted her statement at trial, claiming that she did not
observe defendant and that the police forced her to sign the statement. Assistant State’s Attorney
(ASA) Bob Groebner testified that Palmer provided her signed statement voluntarily and without
coercion.
¶3 On this direct appeal, defendant claims that the State failed to prove him guilty beyond a
reasonable doubt because there is no physical evidence that links defendant to the crime, and that
Fox and Padilla are biased witnesses since they are affiliated with a street gang that is a rival with
defendant’s gang. Defendant also points to inconsistencies in Fox's and Padilla’s testimony to
argue that they are not credible, such as the misidentification of Ramos and Russell at the scene
of the crime. Defendant also argues that Corneh’s testimony alone is not sufficient to affirm the
conviction because she testified that she did not actually observe defendant fire the handgun. For
the following reasons, we affirm defendant’s conviction and sentence.
¶4 BACKGROUND
¶5 Prior to trial, defendant was charged with four counts of aggravated discharge of a firearm
and three counts of attempted murder. The State argued in its opening statement at trial that
2
No. 1-12-2333
defendant fired a handgun at Padilla and Fox’s vehicle because they were affiliated with a rival
gang. The State called seven witnesses, including four eyewitnesses, two police officers, and the
assistant State’s Attorney who obtained the handwritten statement from Palmer. The defense
called Christian Ramos, who testified that he was in school during the shooting, and Detective
Thomas Kolman, who testified that he canvassed the area near the crime scene the day after the
shooting and did not find any property damage or additional witnesses. Defendant exercised his
constitutional right not to testify.
¶6 I. Amanda Padilla’s Testimony
¶7 Amanda Padilla testified that she is 18 years old and that Jermaine Fox is her boyfriend.
On the evening of June 14, 2011, Fox was driving a motor vehicle to pick up her friend, Ndeyiah
Corneh, at Jensen Park in Chicago, and Padilla was sitting in the front passenger side of the
vehicle. Fox was driving his grandfather’s minivan southbound on North Lawndale Avenue,
which is a single-lane, one-way street with vehicles parked on each side of the street. Jensen Park
is located on the west side of Lawndale Avenue, between Leland Avenue on the north and
Wilson Avenue on the south. Fox stopped the vehicle halfway down the block, and Corneh
entered the passenger side of the vehicle and sat in the backseat behind Padilla. Fox continued
driving south on Lawndale Avenue and slowed down as they approached the intersection at
Wilson Avenue.
¶8 At that point, Padilla observed a group of people walking along the sidewalk on the west
side of Lawndale Avenue, and she recognized them as defendant, Jessica Palmer, Christian
Ramos, Jerrell Russell, and Zay Russell. Padilla knew defendant because she had previously
3
No. 1-12-2333
observed him two or three times per week at school, in the neighborhood, and in Jensen Park.
Padilla identified defendant in court. As the group walked near the vehicle, Padilla felt concerned
for her safety because there was hostility between the street gang that people in the group were
members of, the Conservative Vice Lords, and the gang that Fox was associated with, the Simon
City Royals.
¶9 As the vehicle stopped at the stop sign at the intersection of Lawndale and Wilson
Avenues, Padilla observed defendant run toward them, while the rest of the group stayed behind
and watched. Defendant stopped at the corner, removed a black handgun from under his shirt,
and pointed it at the vehicle. Padilla asked Fox to drive away, saying, “Go. He has a gun,” but
Fox had to wait for a jogger that was crossing the intersection on the other side of Wilson
Avenue. Defendant then adjusted the handgun as Fox drove through the intersection. From a
distance “[a]bout a car’s length away,” defendant fired four shots at the vehicle. Padilla had an
unobstructed view of defendant, and it was still daylight.
¶ 10 After defendant fired at the vehicle, people in the park, including defendant, ran in
various directions. Fox continued to drive south on Lawndale Avenue from the intersection as
Padilla called the police on her cellular telephone. Fox then returned to the park, and several
police officers arrived. Padilla exited the vehicle and told the officers what she observed. She
identified defendant as the shooter, and she voluntarily looked up his last name by logging on to
Facebook on her cellular telephone.
¶ 11 On cross-examination, Padilla testified that she was not a member of any street gang, but
admitted that she has been found “delinquent” as a minor for possession of a stolen motor
4
No. 1-12-2333
vehicle. Padilla testified that, the day after the shooting, she did not tell Detectives Kolman and
Katz2 that defendant was a gang member, or that she had observed the entire group running
toward the corner with defendant, rather than standing behind.
¶ 12 Padilla admitted that, when she warned Fox that defendant had a handgun, Fox was
already facing forward and did not look back as he drove through the intersection. She observed
Corneh ducking her head down. At that moment, Padilla also turned around and faced forward as
the vehicle drove through the intersection. Padilla first testified that she observed the handgun
discharge, but when asked to describe what she observed, she admitted that she did not actually
observe defendant fire the gun but heard the first shot. Padilla observed defendant aiming the
handgun with two hands, but did not observe any bullets strike the vehicle. At the time, Padilla,
Fox, and Corneh did not display gang signs or yell out the window to instigate the shooting.
¶ 13 II. Jermaine Fox’s Testimony
¶ 14 Jermaine Fox testified that Padilla is his girlfriend. On June 14, 2011, he and Padilla were
traveling in his grandfather’s minivan to pick up Padilla’s friend Corneh at Jensen Park. After
picking up Corneh, Fox drove the vehicle southbound on Lawndale Avenue, a one-way street,
and slowed down as he approached a stop sign at the intersection with Wilson Avenue. Fox
observed a group of people walking south along the sidewalk in Jensen Park, but he did not pay
attention at first to who was in the group and he continued driving.
¶ 15 As Fox stopped the vehicle at the intersection, Padilla warned him that one member of
the group was approaching the vehicle with a gun. Fox turned back to look and he observed
2
Detective Katz’s first name does not appear in the appellate record.
5
No. 1-12-2333
defendant, whom he knew from the neighborhood, running toward them and pointing a black
handgun in the direction of the vehicle. The rest of the group, including Christian Ramos and Zay
Russell, stood behind defendant and screamed at him. Fox identified defendant in court and
explained that he knew defendant from the Albany Park neighborhood. Defendant stopped for a
moment and adjusted his handgun, while a jogger crossed the intersection, preventing Fox from
speeding away. As the jogger crossed Lawndale Avenue, Fox drove through the intersection, and
he observed defendant fire four shots at the vehicle from the distance of “about a car’s length.”
Nothing obstructed Fox’s view of defendant, and he did not observe anyone else with a firearm.
It was still daylight at the time of the shooting, and the windows on the passenger side of the
vehicle were rolled down.
¶ 16 Everyone that was present in the park at the time of the shooting, including defendant, ran
away after defendant fired his handgun. Fox continued to drive away from the intersection while
Padilla called the police on her cellular telephone. The 911 operator told Padilla to return to the
park, so Fox drove back to the intersection of Lawndale and Wilson Avenues, and the police
were already there when they arrived. Fox did not discuss the incident with Padilla and Corneh
before they returned to the park because they were “still in shock.” Fox told the police what he
observed, and Padilla showed defendant’s Facebook page to a police officer to identify
defendant’s last name.
¶ 17 On cross-examination, Fox testified that he was never a “member” of the Simon City
Royals street gang, though he had been “affiliated” with the gang in the past because he was
friends with gang members. Fox testified that he did not remember telling Detectives Kolman
6
No. 1-12-2333
and Katz that he was a member of the Simon City Royals gang. Though Fox denied a current
gang affiliation, he stated that Padilla was affiliated with the Simon City Royals because she
associated with members of the gang.3 Fox did not display any gang signs or do anything else to
instigate the events, and Jensen Park was considered a neutral territory for children and was not
run by any particular gang.
¶ 18 Fox testified that he was looking straight ahead when he heard the first gunshot, but he
looked back over his shoulder and observed defendant fire the handgun in the direction of the
minivan a second and third time. Fox also described defendant as aiming the handgun at the
vehicle with one hand, not two as Padilla previously testified. Fox did not hear any bullets strike
the vehicle.
¶ 19 III. Ndeyiah Corneh’s Testimony
¶ 20 Ndeyiah Corneh testified that she is 15 years old and is friends with Padilla. On June 14,
2011, Fox and Padilla picked up Corneh from Jensen Park, and she entered the passenger side of
the vehicle and sat behind Padilla. Fox then drove the vehicle south on Lawndale Avenue and
slowed down because there was a vehicle in front of them stopped at the stop sign at the Wilson
Avenue intersection. Corneh noticed a group of people walking south along the sidewalk on the
west side of Lawndale Avenue, and she recognized one member of the group as a girl named
Corrinn that she knew from school.4 As the vehicle stopped at the intersection, Padilla turned
3
The trial court noted that it “did not know what to make” of Fox’s and Padilla’s
testimony concerning gang membership, and as far as it pertained to the charges that defendant
faced, the issue of who belonged to what gang did not “make a difference in the world.”
4
Corrinn’s last name does not appear in the appellate record.
7
No. 1-12-2333
around and stated that defendant was one of the people in the group. Corneh looked back and
observed defendant at the intersection walking towards the vehicle holding a handgun. Corneh
knew defendant from around the park, and she identified him in court.
¶ 21 From a distance of “a car’s length apart,” defendant stood at the end of the sidewalk with
one foot in the street and raised a handgun, aiming it at the vehicle. There was nothing between
Corneh and defendant that obstructed her view, and it was still daylight at the time. Corneh then
ducked her head down and heard three or four gunshots fired in quick succession. Fox drove
from the intersection and Corneh did not raise her head until they were near Sunnyside Avenue,
one city block south. Padilla called the police on her cellular telephone, and they returned to the
park as the police instructed. Corneh identified herself to a police officer, and Padilla told the
police what had happened.
¶ 22 On cross-examination, Corneh testified that Padilla was previously affiliated with the
Simon City Royals and that she did not know if Fox was a member of the gang. No one in the
vehicle displayed gang signs or yelled out of the window to provoke a confrontation with the
group.
¶ 23 IV. Jessica Palmer’s Testimony
¶ 24 Jessica Palmer testified that she is 15 years old, and on the evening of June 14, 2011, she
was playing basketball with a group of friends in Jensen Park, and never left the park prior to the
shooting. Two of Palmer’s friends, Corrine and Albert, were present in the park that evening.5
5
Neither Corrine nor Albert’s last name appears in the appellate record. The name
Corrine may also have been erroneously transcribed as "Corrinn" elsewhere in the record.
8
No. 1-12-2333
Palmer was playing basketball when she heard gunshots and she immediately ran toward Leland
Avenue. Palmer stopped at the park’s playground and picked up her younger brother, Thomas,6
and the two ran home. Prior to the shooting, there were dozens of people in the park, and Palmer
only knew a few of them. Palmer testified that she did not know defendant, and that she did not
remember if she observed him in the park that evening. Palmer also did not remember observing
Jerrell Russell in the park that evening.
¶ 25 The next day, the police arrested Palmer at school and took her to the 17th District police
station where they questioned her about the shooting. After an hour, the police called Palmer’s
mother, who arrived at the police station and sat next to Palmer while the police questioned her
further. Afterwards, an assistant State’s Attorney interviewed Palmer concerning what she
observed prior to the shooting. Palmer felt threatened and scared, and she and her mother were
crying, so Palmer told the police a false story. The police then wrote down what Palmer said and
forced her to sign the statement.
¶ 26 In her original signed statement to the police, Palmer stated that, while she was playing
basketball in Jensen Park on June 14, 2011, she left the park for a short time with her friend
Corrine, and the two walked to Corrine’s house, which was nearby.7 After Corrine checked in
with her parents, she and Palmer walked back to Jensen Park. When they returned, Palmer
observed her friend Albert speaking with Jerrell, and then the two walked towards the basketball
court. Jerrell then pointed to a gold-colored minivan and shouted, “There they go, right there.”
6
Thomas’s last name does not appear in the appellate record.
7
At this point, the trial court admonished Palmer for her improper attitude in responding
to the assistant State’s Attorney’s questions.
9
No. 1-12-2333
Palmer then observed a man, who she knew from the park, run toward the minivan holding his
waistband.8 Palmer lost sight of defendant because there were parked vehicles on Lawndale
obstructing her view. Palmer then heard three gunshots. At trial, Palmer claimed that she did not
remember making any of these statements to the police or the assistant State’s Attorney, other
than that she had heard three gunshots. Her statement concluded that, after the shots were fired,
everyone in the park scattered and Palmer picked up her younger brother from the playground
and ran home.
¶ 27 On cross-examination, Palmer testified that she had met defendant prior to the shooting
and that she had observed him at Jensen Park on prior occasions. Palmer denied knowing Zay
Russell, Christian Ramos, or Ndeyiah Corneh. Palmer testified that Padilla had fought with her
three or four months prior to the shooting, and that she knew that Fox was Padilla’s boyfriend.
Palmer testified that she did not remember which direction she heard the gunshots originate
from, and that she did not remember exactly how many shots were fired. Palmer stated that she
did not observe defendant, or anyone else, run toward the minivan holding his waistband.
¶ 28 Palmer explained that, the day after the shooting, she was arrested at school and
transported to the 17th District police station and placed alone in a holding cell. Two hours later,
an unidentified officer entered the cell and grabbed Palmer and threatened that she would go to
jail if she did not talk. Palmer did not verbally reply to the officer, and he then led Palmer out of
the cell and into an interrogation room, where another unidentified officer joined him in
8
Palmer’s statement originally named this individual as defendant, but at some point his
name was crossed out, and Palmer’s initials appear next to the correction. However, Palmer
identified defendant in a photograph as the man that she observed running towards the minivan.
10
No. 1-12-2333
threatening Palmer with jail if she did not speak. The officers then left Palmer alone in the room
for another two hours, until Palmer’s mother arrived at the police station. Palmer’s mother
entered the room and sat next to Palmer, followed shortly afterward by a third unidentified police
officer. The officer then told Palmer that other witnesses had implicated her in the shooting, and
he questioned Palmer about the events leading up to the shooting. Palmer testified that she then
“made up a story” because she believed that doing so would spare her a trip to jail. Palmer was
then forced to sign a statement that detailed a false account of the shooting, and she was not
given an opportunity to read it.
¶ 29 V. Police Officer John Geisbush’s Testimony
¶ 30 Officer John Geisbush testified that he has been a police officer for the Chicago police
department for nine years. On the evening of June 14, 2011, Officer Geisbush was patrolling the
area near Jensen Park in a marked police vehicle with his partner, Officer Patricia Ramirez. At
7:15 p.m., Geisbush and his partner received a radio dispatch that gunshots were fired in Jensen
Park, and they drove to the intersection of Lawndale and Wilson. A few minutes after their
arrival, a tan Kia Sedona minivan drove up to the intersection and the occupants exited and
identified themselves as Jermaine Fox, Amanda Padilla, and Ndeyiah Corneh. Geisbush and his
partner first spoke with Padilla, who told them that she observed defendant fire a handgun at the
vehicle. Geisbush next spoke with Fox and Corneh concerning the shooting. All three witnesses
pointed out the northwest corner of the intersection as the place where defendant was standing
when he shot at the vehicle. Geisbush walked over to the area and observed four spent shell
11
No. 1-12-2333
casing lying in the street. Geisbush recovered the shell casings, placed them in a bag, and
inventoried them.
¶ 31 After speaking with the three witnesses, Geisbush sent out a flash message9 describing the
suspect as a black male, 5 feet 7 inches and 130 pounds, named “Saber,” and wearing a black hat,
black shirt, and black jeans. The message also described three other suspects that were in the
group, including Jerrell Russell, Christian Ramos, and Jessica Palmer. The flash message did not
identify Zay Russell as a suspect. At some point, Padilla voluntarily logged on to Facebook on
her cellular telephone and looked up defendant’s last name, which she provided to Geisbush.
¶ 32 On cross-examination, Officer Geisbush testified that his supervisor arrived at the crime
scene and ordered him to recover the shell casings instead of waiting for an evidence technician
to do it. Geisbush surveyed the vehicle and did not find any damage from the shooting, and he
and his partner later canvassed the area but did not find any property damage to nearby vehicles
or residences or any additional eyewitnesses.
¶ 33 VI. Police Officer Matthew Rogus’s Testimony
¶ 34 Officer Matthew Rogus testified that he has been a Chicago police officer for eight years.
On June 15, 2011, Officer Rogus read a case report at the 17th District police station concerning
the shooting in Jensen Park the previous day. While reading the report, Rogus recognized
defendant from previous encounters in the 17th District, and he knew defendant was a member of
the Conservative Vice Lords gang. Rogus and five other officers then drove to a building on
9
A flash message is a broadcast of updated information from the crime scene that is
transmitted to nearby police officers.
12
No. 1-12-2333
North Central Park Avenue where many Conservative Vice Lords were known to congregate.
Rogus had previously observed defendant at the residence several times prior to June 15, 2011,
most recently within the past week.
¶ 35 When Rogus arrived at the location, he observed defendant and Jerrell Russell near the
front of the building smoking cigarettes. As Rogus and his team exited their vehicles, defendant
and Jerrell ran away from the officers to the back of the residence. Rogus yelled, “Stop, police,”
and chased after the suspects. Defendant stopped near the porch and was arrested, and Jerrell was
arrested inside the building soon afterward.
¶ 36 On cross-examination, Rogus testified that the building where he arrested defendant was
Jerrell’s residence. Rogus admitted that he did not know for sure if defendant was a member of a
street gang, but he based his assumption that defendant was a Conservative Vice Lord on who he
had observed defendant associate with in the past. Rogus did not observe any gang tattoos on
defendant’s body.
¶ 37 After Rogus’ testimony, the parties stipulated that, if called to testify, Aimee Stevens
would state that she is a forensic scientist with the Illinois State Police crime lab, and that she is
an expert in firearms identification. Stevens would further testify that she analyzed the four shell
casings recovered from the crime scene and opined that they were all fired from the same .380-
caliber handgun. The State’s next witness, ASA Robert Groebner, was unavailable, so the trial
court allowed the defense to call its first witness out of order.
13
No. 1-12-2333
¶ 38 VII. Christian Ramos’s Testimony
¶ 39 Christian Ramos testified that he is 20 years old and that he knew defendant from high
school but he never observed defendant off of school grounds. Ramos had observed Palmer in
Jensen Park on occasion, but he did not know her personally. Ramos met Jerrell once or twice,
but he did not know him very well. Ramos did not know who Corneh was. On June 14, 2011,
Ramos was attending class at Harry S. Truman College in Chicago from 5:30 p.m. until 10 p.m.,
and he was not in Jensen Park that evening.
¶ 40 Sometime afterward, the police stopped Ramos while was driving and told him that
witnesses implicated him in the shooting at Jensen Park on June 14, 2011. Ramos was placed in
custody and transported to the police station where he explained to the officers that he was in
school at the time of the shooting, and he was released five or six hours later.
¶ 41 On cross-examination, Ramos testified that, prior to trial, he initially told the assistant
State’s Attorney that he did not remember whether he was arrested in April 2011 or August 2011,
but he ultimately deduced that the police arrested him on August 7, 2011, though he was not sure
of the exact date. Ramos also did not remember the date of the shooting, but he knew that it
occurred on a Tuesday.10 Ramos admitted that he was found delinquent as a minor of unlawful
use of a weapon in either 2004 or 2005 and he received probation. Ramos was also found
delinquent of aggravated battery in 2008 and he was sentenced as a juvenile to the Illinois
Department of Corrections.
10
The date of the shooting, June 14, 2011, did in fact fall on a Tuesday.
14
No. 1-12-2333
¶ 42 After Ramos’s testimony, the State resumed its case-in-chief and called its final witness,
ASA Bob Groebner.
¶ 43 VIII. ASA Bob Groebner’s Testimony
¶ 44 ASA Bob Groebner testified that, on June 15, 2011, he was working in the felony review
unit for the Cook County State’s Attorney, and his duties included interviewing witnesses,
victims, and defendants in criminal cases. That day, Groebner was assigned to interview Palmer,
who was identified as a witness to the Jensen Park shooting the previous day. Groebner drove to
the 17th District police station and met with Palmer, who was accompanied by her mother in an
interview room. Groebner introduced himself as a prosecutor, and both Palmer and her mother
consented to having a conversation with him concerning the shooting. After a 20-minute
discussion, Palmer agreed to provide a handwritten statement memorializing what she witnessed
at the park. Groebner asked Palmer questions about what she observed, and he summarized each
of her answers in the statement.
¶ 45 After the interview, Groebner asked Palmer and her mother if they felt they had been
treated fairly by the police, and both responded yes. Palmer was a witness and was never
handcuffed during the interview. Palmer testified that her statement was given freely and
voluntarily and that the police did not threaten her or make any promises to her. In the presence
of her mother, Palmer read the first page of her statement out loud, and she signed the page after
affirming that the information was accurate. Groebner read the rest of the statement out loud, and
Palmer corrected the statement on page three, requesting that defendant’s first name be crossed
out because Palmer did not know him by name and that she knew him from observing him
15
No. 1-12-2333
around the park. Groebner crossed out defendant’s first name, and Palmer, her mother, Groebner,
and Detective Katz placed their initials next to the correction. Palmer then signed each page after
acknowledging that the statements contained therein were accurate. In addition, Groebner,
Palmer’s mother, and Detective Katz signed each individual page. Groebner did not force Palmer
to sign the statement. Groebner identified the handwritten statement in court and it was offered
into evidence without objection.
¶ 46 On cross-examination, Groebner testified that one of the police reports he reviewed prior
to interviewing Palmer indicated that witnesses observed Palmer standing next to the shooter,
though Palmer had been excluded as a suspect by the time Groebner arrived at the police station.
Groebner interviewed Russell11 and took a handwritten statement from Fox, but he did not speak
with Padilla, Corneh, Ramos or Palmer’s friends, Albert and Corrinn. Palmer and her mother
appeared to have a “normal” demeanor at the police station and did not appear to have been
crying.
¶ 47 After Groebner’s testimony, the State rested, and the trial court denied the defense’s
motion for a directed finding.
¶ 48 IX. Detective Thomas Kolman’s Testimony
¶ 49 The defense’s second witness was Detective Thomas Kolman, who testified that he has
been a Chicago police officer for 18 years. On June 15, 2011, Detectives Kolman and Katz were
assigned to investigate the previous day’s shooting. Defendant, Jerrell, and Palmer were already
in custody when Kolman arrived at the 17th District police station. Kolman first reviewed the
11
Groebner does not state whether he is referring to Jerrell Russell or his brother Zay.
16
No. 1-12-2333
police reports concerning the shooting and then learned that Padilla, Fox, and Corneh were at the
police station and were available to be interviewed. Kolman first spoke with Padilla, who stated
that she observed defendant, Russell,12 Ramos, and Palmer running toward the minivan just
before the shooting, and that Fox was a Simon City Royal gang member at that time. Kolman
next interviewed Fox, and he told Kolman that he also observed defendant, Russell, Ramos, and
Palmer running toward the minivan. Fox told Kolman that he was a Simon City Royal gang
member in the past and still was a current member of the gang. Kolman did not interview Ramos,
or either of Palmer’s friends, Albert or Corrinn. Though Kolman did not meet with Palmer, he
observed her in a processing room and noted that she was not in handcuffs and testified that she
was never placed in a holding cell.
¶ 50 Kolman and Katz recanvassed the area near the crime scene on June 16, 2011, and they
did not locate any additional witnesses or discover property damage to nearby vehicles or
residences as a result of the shooting. Kolman did not perform a gunshot residue test on
defendant to determine if he had recently fired a handgun because too much time had passed
since the shooting. Also, Kolman explained that the shell casings were not sent to the Illinois
State Police crime lab for fingerprint analysis because he is not allowed to do that.
¶ 51 On cross-examination, Kolman testified that he did not present a photo array or physical
lineup to the victims because all three stated that they personally knew defendant.
12
Kolman does not state whether Padilla was referring to Jerrell Russell or his brother
Zay.
17
No. 1-12-2333
¶ 52 Following Kolman’s testimony, the parties stipulated that Zay Russell was in the custody
of the Illinois Department of Corrections on June 14, 2011. Defendant exercised his right not to
testify, and the defense rested.
¶ 53 During closing arguments, the State argued that defendant escalated the feud between the
rival gangs when he fired four shots at the vehicle and that the witnesses were credible because:
(1) they had no bias toward defendant personally; (2) they had little time to fabricate a story after
the shooting; and (3) their testimony was corroborated by Palmer, who initially told the police
that she observed defendant run toward the vehicle shortly before she heard gunshots. The State
claimed that the victims’ testimony was further corroborated by the recovery of four shell casings
at the intersection and that there was no damage discovered because defendant had poor aim.
¶ 54 The defense argued that the State failed to prove defendant guilty beyond a reasonable
doubt because Fox’s and Padilla’s gang affiliations showed that they had a motive to lie about
the shooting. Their credibility was further challenged by the fact that they both testified that
Ramos and Zay Russell were in the group with defendant, but Ramos testified that he was in
school at the time, and the parties stipulated that Zay was incarnated during the shooting. The
defense claimed that the younger Corneh was “playing follow the leader” by changing her story
to fit whatever Fox and Padilla said, and the defense noted that she did not testify that she
actually observed defendant fire the handgun. Further, the defense argued that Palmer recanted
her signed statement because the police threatened her with jail. The defense also claimed that
there was no physical evidence that corroborated the victims’ testimony because: (1) no handgun
was recovered; (2) there was no gunshot residue test performed; and (3) there were no
18
No. 1-12-2333
fingerprints or DNA linking defendant to the crime. The defense concluded that there would have
been damage to the vehicle had defendant shot at it from such a close distance.
¶ 55 After closing arguments, the trial court stated that it assessed the credibility and demeanor
of the witnesses, and that it relied on each witness’s credibility. The trial court determined that
Fox and Padilla were credible, and that Corneh was the most reliable witness, rejecting the claim
that she fabricated her story to fit Fox’s and Padilla’s accounts of the events. The trial court
discredited Palmer’s testimony and found that she was “an awful witness” who told “absurd,
ridiculous lies” in her testimony to “get out from under the statements that she made earlier.” The
trial court noted that ASA Groebner’s testimony indicated that Palmer had lied in court. The trial
court also determined that Ramos lied about being in school, finding that he “has no idea what
happened, he has no idea when it happened, but knows that he has an alibi for it.” The trial court
concluded that there was “no doubt” that defendant fired a handgun at the vehicle, and it found
defendant guilty of all four counts of aggravated discharge of a firearm. However, the trial court
found defendant not guilty on the three counts of attempted murder, explaining that the State did
not meet the high burden of proof to establish the specific mental state and intent.
¶ 56 The defense filed a posttrial motion for a new trial, claiming that the State did not prove
that defendant fired the handgun in the direction of the vehicle because there was no evidence of
any damage to the vehicle or to nearby property. The trial court denied the motion and stated that
it would not reward defendant for not being “a better shot.”
¶ 57 The trial court held a sentencing hearing, and after hearing factors in aggravation and
mitigation, it sentenced defendant to seven years in the Illinois Department of Corrections, with
19
No. 1-12-2333
400 days credit for time served, 2 years' mandatory supervised release, and $714 in mandatory
fines, fees, and costs. Defendant appeals his conviction and sentence.
¶ 58 ANALYSIS
¶ 59 On appeal, defendant argues that the State did not prove him guilty beyond a reasonable
doubt because Fox and Padilla are biased witnesses since they are affiliated with a rival street
gang. Defendant also points to inconsistencies in Fox’s and Padilla’s testimony to argue that they
are not credible, such as the misidentification of Ramos and Russell at the scene of the crime.
Defendant also argues that Corneh’s testimony alone is not sufficient to affirm the conviction
because she testified that she did not actually observe defendant fire the handgun. Additionally,
defendant claims that there is no physical evidence that links defendant to the crime. For the
following reasons, we find the evidence sufficient for a finding of guilty of aggravated discharge
of a firearm, and we affirm.
¶ 60 I. Standard of Review
¶ 61 When a defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, the standard of review is
“