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. Porter

Court of Appeals of Illinois, First District, Third Division

November 12, 2014

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
DAWN PORTER, Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County. No. 12 CR 8898. Honorable John Joseph Hynes, Judge Presiding.

Affirmed in part and vacated in part; fines and fees order corrected.

SYLLABUS

On appeal from defendant's conviction for retail theft, the trial court rejected defendant's contention that the circumstances warranted a remand for consideration of her pro se posttrial allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel under Krankel, since her claim that her counsel was ineffective in refusing to follow her suggestion that an argument should have been raised that the video tape presented by the store security " wasn't telling the truth" because the " whole tape" was not played was not sufficiently specific to warrant further inquiry under Krankel; however, the circuit court clerk was directed to vacate the DNA analysis fee in view of the fact that defendant was already registered in the DNA database.

FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE: Whitney Bond, State's Attorney, County of Cook, Chicago, IL.

FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT: Jessica D. Pamon, Office of the State Appellate Defender, Chicago, IL.

JUSTICE HYMAN delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion. Justices Lavin and Mason concurred in the judgment and opinion.

OPINION

Page 1213

HYMAN, JUSTICE

[¶1] Following a bench trial, defendant, Dawn Porter, was found guilty of retail theft and sentenced to a four-year prison term. On appeal, Porter contends that the cause should be remanded for consideration of her pro se posttrial claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel under People v. Krankel, 102 Ill.2d 181, 187-89, 464 N.E.2d 1045, 80 Ill.Dec. 62 (1984). We find Porter's ineffective assistance of counsel claim insufficiently specific to support the duty to conduct further inquiry under Krankel. Porter also contends that the $250 DNA fee imposed by the court must be vacated and we agree.

[¶2] Background

[¶3] At trial, Omar Ferreira testified that on March 7, 2012, he was working the 11 a.m. to 8 p.m. shift as a loss prevention agent at the Wal-Mart store in Bridgeview, Illinois. When he arrived at the store about 11 a.m., he saw Dawn Porter carrying a plastic bag in the infant department. She appeared to be " anxious" and " nervous," and was looking around and shaking. Ferreira walked to the back of the store to " clock in" for the day, and when he returned to the infant department, Porter was gone.

[¶4] Ferreira then went to his office, activated the store's surveillance cameras, and rewound the existing footage to find Porter. While watching that footage from multiple cameras with varying viewpoints, Ferreira saw Porter pick up a box containing a baby cradle swing and place it into her shopping cart. He then observed her as she pushed the shopping cart with the large box inside of it through the lingerie department and toward the men's department, before heading to the customer service desk. After collecting this information, Ferreira called Sarah Troutman, the service desk associate, who told him that Porter had returned merchandise without a receipt. Ferreira then ran toward the exit and introduced himself to Porter. She accompanied him to his office, where Ferreira recovered a Wal-Mart gift card from Porter. The surveillance videos were played for the court, and defendant's actions were narrated by Ferreira.

[¶5] Sarah Troutman testified that she was working as a customer service agent at the Wal-Mart service desk, where she processed customer returns, refunds, and exchanges. Porter approached her register with a baby swing and asked to ...


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.