APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIFTH DISTRICT
Alan C. Downen, State's Attorney of Hamilton County,
517 N.E.2d 682, 164 Ill. App. 3d 183, 115 Ill. Dec. 271 1987.IL.1896
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Hamilton County; the Hon. Lehman D. Krause, Judge, presiding.
PRESIDING JUSTICE HARRISON delivered the opinion of the court. KARNS, J., concurs. JUSTICE WELCH, Dissenting.
DECISION OF THE COURT DELIVERED BY THE HONORABLE JUDGE HARRISON
Alan C. Downen, State's Attorney of Hamilton County, appeals from orders entered by the Hamilton County circuit court which (1) appointed a special prosecutor to impanel a grand jury to investigate possible violations of the law which may have occurred during the prosecution of Jerome Gholson for solicitation to murder Downen, (2) denied Downen's motion to vacate the order appointing the special prosecutor, and (3) refused to grant Downen's request for a change of venue. For the reasons which follow, this appeal shall be dismissed.
The action giving rise to Downen's appeal commenced when Jerome Gholson petitioned the circuit court of Hamilton County to appoint a special prosecutor pursuant to section 6 of "An Act in regard to attorneys general and state's attorneys" (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1985, ch. 14, par. 6) "charged with plenary power to investigate potential violations of the Criminal Code" in connection with Gholson's prosecution in Crawford County for solicitation to murder Downen. Gholson was acquitted of that charge following a jury trial.
In his petition, which was verified, Gholson set forth specific and detailed factual allegations suggesting that various criminal acts may have been committed in connection with the unsuccessful attempt to secure his conviction. These included:
(1) official misconduct arising from the State's payments to an informant who was called to testify as part of its case, aiding the informant and his wife in avoiding prosecution for passing bad checks and favorably disposing of criminal charges against the husband of a potential witness in exchange for that witness' cooperation with the State's case;
(2) compounding a crime by making the payments to the State's informant, who was not called as an expert witness;
(3) violation of State law governing eavesdropping devices and official misconduct and obstruction of Justice associated with those violations; and
(4) obstruction of Justice, perjury and official misconduct involving an inaccurate report prepared by a criminal investigator for the State and testimony ...