Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

People v. Wright

Court of Appeals of Illinois, Third District

July 16, 2013

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
LAVORIS LARENZO WRIGHT, Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the Circuit Court of the 10th Judicial Circuit, Peoria County, Illinois, Circuit Nos. 09-CF-911 and 09-CF-912 Honorable Glenn H. Collier, Judge, Presiding.

JUSTICE HOLDRIDGE delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion. Justices Schmidt and O'Brien concurred in the judgment and opinion.

OPINION

HOLDRIDGE JUSTICE

¶ 1 Following a stipulated bench trial, defendant, Lavoris Larenzo Wright, was found guilty of armed robbery (720 ILCS 5/18-2(a)(2) (West 2008)) and attempted armed robbery (720 ILCS 5/8-4(a), 18-2(a)(2) (West 2008)), for which he was sentenced to concurrent terms of 21 and 10 years of imprisonment, respectively. Defendant filed a motion for the court to reconsider the sentence, which was denied. Defendant appealed, arguing that: (1) the indictment charging armed robbery was void; (2) the trial court erred in imposing two orders for defendant to submit a deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) sample and DNA analysis fee; and (3) the trial court erred in imposing a 15-year sentencing enhancement on the armed robbery conviction. We affirm as modified.

¶ 2 FACTS

¶ 3 In case No. 09-CF-911, defendant was charged with armed robbery of the convenience store Mark's Market. The indictment alleged that on August 17, 2009, defendant committed armed robbery in that "while armed with a dangerous weapon, a firearm" he took money from William Randle by threatening imminent use of force in violation of section 18-2(a)(2) of the Criminal Code of 1961 (Code) (720 ILCS 5/18-2(a)(2) (West 2008)). In case No. 09-CF-912, defendant was charged with attempted armed robbery, with allegations that on August 17, 2009, he performed a substantial step toward the commission of armed robbery by entering the Subway while armed with a firearm and demanding money from James Hinds.

¶ 4 On June 6, 2010, defendant was found guilty of both counts in a stipulated bench trial. In exchange for a negotiated plea agreement, defendant stipulated to the evidence that the State would have presented at trial.

¶ 5 Specifically, the parties stipulated that Randle would have testified that on August 17, 2009, he was working at Mark's Market when two men entered with bandanas covering their faces. One man pointed a gun at Randle and demanded money. Randle placed the money tray from the cash register on the counter. One of the men took all the paper currency, and the robbers fled. Randle gave a description of the two robbers to police. An in-store video recording generally corroborated Randle's account.

¶ 6 In his oral and videotaped statements to police, defendant admitted that he had been approached by one of the other suspects about committing a robbery. Defendant agreed to become involved with the robberies because he needed the money. Defendant obtained a handgun from his house and drove around with two other males looking for places to rob. They decided to rob Mark's Market. Defendant took the money from the cash register tray in Mark's Market while another male pointed the gun at the clerk. After taking the money, all three men fled. They continued to drive around looking for more places to rob and decided to rob a Subway restaurant. Defendant went into the Subway to commit the robbery but became nervous. Defendant and the other two suspects fled from the Subway in a vehicle. Subsequently, they were pulled over by police.

¶ 7 The parties stipulated that Hinds would have testified that on August 17, 2009, he was working at Subway when two suspects, whose faces were covered with bandanas, entered the restaurant, pointed a gun at him, and demanded money. When another employee came out of the stockroom, the suspects fled. Another witness would have testified that a third suspect fled with the other two suspects. After receiving a description of the suspects, Officer Chris White of the Peoria police department stopped a vehicle in which defendant was riding in the backseat. White observed a bandana located on the driver's lap. A loaded handgun and a stack of money were located in the center console of the vehicle.

¶ 8 Hinds identified the two males riding in the front of the car as the suspects involved in the Subway incident. The other witness identified defendant as the third person involved in the Subway incident.

¶ 9 The court found defendant guilty of armed robbery. In accordance with the parties' agreed-upon sentence, the court sentenced defendant to concurrent terms of imprisonment of 10 years for attempted armed robbery and 21 years for armed robbery. Pursuant to section 18-2(b) of the Code, defendant's sentence for armed robbery included a mandatory 15-year enhancement because a firearm was wielded during the robbery. See 720 ILCS 5/18-2(b) (West 2008). Additionally, as part of the sentence in each case, defendant was also ordered to submit a DNA sample and pay a $200 DNA analysis assessment. Defendant filed a motion to reconsider sentence, which the trial court denied. Defendant appealed.

¶ 10 ANALYSIS

ΒΆ 11 I. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.