Appeal from Circuit Court of Champaign County No. 10CF773 Honorable Thomas J. Difanis, Judge Presiding.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Justice McCULLOUGH
JUSTICE McCULLOUGH delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion. Presiding Justice Turner concurred in the judgment and opinion.
Justice Cook specially concurred, with opinion.
¶ 1 On October 14, 2010, a jury convicted defendant, Johnathan D. Brock, of unlawful delivery of a controlled substance. On November 23, 2010, the trial court sentenced defendant as a Class X offender pursuant to section 5-5-3(c)(8) of the Unified Code of Corrections (Unified Code) (730 ILCS 5/5-5-3(c) (8) (West 2008)) to 25 years in prison.
¶ 2 On appeal, defendant argues his trial counsel was ineffective. We affirm.
¶ 3 On May 10, 2010, the State charged defendant by information with single counts of unlawful possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance (count I) (720 ILCS 570/407(b)(2) (West 2008)) and unlawful possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance (count II) (720 ILCS 570/401(d) (West 2008)). On October 12, 2010, the State charged defendant by information with unlawful delivery of a controlled substance (count III) (720 ILCS 570/401(d) (West 2008)). The first and second counts were later dismissed. Defendant pleaded not guilty.
¶ 4 On October 13, 2010, defendant's trial commenced. Samantha Morris testified she was a confidential source for the Urbana police department. She stated that on April 30, 2010, she agreed to purchase cocaine from defendant. Urbana police officer Jay Loschen gave Morris $50 to purchase the drugs and Sergeant Sylvia Morgan fitted Morris with a buttonhole video camera. Morris rode her bicycle to defendant's residence. While riding to defendant's residence, Morris stopped and called defendant from her cell phone. When Morris arrived at defendant's home, defendant invited her inside. While there, defendant gave Morris a sandwich bag with a marble-sized ball tied to the corner. Defendant took the $50. After Morris left defendant's residence, she met with Officer Loschen and Sergeant Morgan to hand over the drugs and the video camera. Without objection, the State introduced the video recording into evidence and played it for the jury. Morris testified that the recording was an accurate depiction of the events. Morris also identified a series of still photographs that were produced from the video.
¶ 5 Devin Baxter testified he was a confidential source for the Urbana police department. He accompanied Morris on April 30, 2009, when Morris agreed to purchase cocaine from defendant.
¶ 6 Urbana police sergeant Sylvia Morgan testified Morris and Baxter agreed to work as confidential sources. Prior to the transaction with defendant, Officer Loschen gave Morris $50 after Sergeant Morgan searched her and found no contraband. Following the transaction with defendant, Morris and Baxter met Loschen and Morgan and transferred the cocaine Morris had just purchased from defendant.
¶ 7 Officer Loschen testified that Urbana police officers executed a search warrant at defendant's residence on May 7, 2010. Police officers seized a digital scale containing white powder residue, razor blades, sandwich bags, and a cell phone. Defendant was placed under arrest. Defendant stated he may have sold crack cocaine in January or February but he had not sold any recently. According to defendant, he did not sell cocaine to anyone on April 30 but it was possible that he may have given crack cocaine to somebody.
¶ 8 Hope Erwin, a forensic scientist with the Illinois State Police, analyzed exhibit No. 3. Exhibit No. 3 was a plastic bag with six-tenths of a gram of cocaine base.
¶ 9 Defendant did not testify. Following closing arguments, the jury convicted defendant of unlawful delivery of a controlled substance. After denying defendant's motion for a new trial, the trial court sentenced defendant as stated. This appeal followed.
¶ 10 Defendant argues trial counsel was ineffective for failing to file a motion to suppress the video recording of the drug transaction between him and Morris because the recording was obtained without a warrant in violation of article I, section 6, of the Illinois ...