A fifteen year old was charged and convicted of aggravated criminal sexual assault, rape. The defendant was tried as an adult and sentenced to 36 years in prison, of which he will have to serve 85%. The Illinois Court of Appeals reversed, finding that the defendant’s confession was wrongly admitted, and that the victim’s sexual history should have been admitted under an exception to the Illinois Rape Shield statute. The Illinois Supreme Court reversed and remanded to the appellate court to consider only the defendant’s excessive sentence claim.
The State alleged that Defendant raped his counselor when she was taking him back to the residential treatment facility in which he lived.
The State raised two issues on appeal to the Illinois Supreme Court. First, whether the statement should have been suppressed and second, whether the trial court properly applied the rape shield statute.
One of the issues for suppression was whether the police officers reasonably attempted to notify an adult when Defendant was arrested since he was a minor. The notice requirement requires that a law enforcement officer who arrests a minor should make a reasonable attempt to notify a parent or other person legally responsible for the minor’s care. 705 ILCS 405/5-405(2). The Supreme Court found that the Schaumberg police officer’s attempts to comply with this statute were reasonable and reversed the appellate court’s suppression of defendant’s confession.
The Supreme Court also reversed the appellate court decision that victims prior sexual history should have been admitted. The Supreme Court found that the trial attorney did not provide sufficient proof as to the cause of the victim’s cervical redness.
However, the Supreme Court did remand the case back to the appellate court to consider the defendant’s claim the his sentence was excessive.
People v. Patterson, No. 115102 (October 17, 2014).