The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, PlaintiffAppellee, [408 Ill.App.3d 733] A jury found the defendant, Jason Lara, guilty of two counts of predatory criminal sexual assault (PCSA) for inserting his finger into the vagina of an eight-year-old girl, J.O. She did not tell her mother or Shelley about either incident because she thought she would get in trouble. Sign up for our free summaries and get the latest delivered directly to you. m01 Case Briefing.docx - Jason Lara V. State of Illinois Accordingly, we vacate Jason's convictions for PCSA, reduce Jason's convictions for PCSA to convictions for ACSA, and remand for sentencing on the ACSA convictions. [76], Justice Stephen Breyer delivered the opinion of the court on April 19, 2004. when he was 19. As part of our judgment, we grant the State its $50 statutory assessment against defendant as costs of this appeal. issues. [25], Billy Jo Lara was an enrolled member of the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians located in northern North Dakota near the CanadaU.S. 3d 1072, 909 N.E.2d 391 (2009). Definition of Search Bond v. U.S. Steagald v. U.S. He could not make much sense of what the officers had tried to say to him. In the figure above, the wage rate is $600 and total fixed cost is $15,000. In June 2008, the State filed a notice of its intent to use out-of-court statements made by R.K. to Officer Eric Luckey, a Eureka police officer, on May 9, 2008, at the Child Advocacy Center in Eureka, Illinois, pursuant to section 115 10(a) of the Code (725 ILCS 5/115 10(a) (West 2006)). Further, defendant had the opportunity to cross-examine her. Shifting Scales; Body Politic; Top Advocates Report; Site Feedback; Support Oyez & LII; LII Supreme Court Resources [43] The Eighth Circuit's panel noted that in the Duro decision, the Supreme Court had observed that Congress could address the jurisdictional system, which Congress did. 3d at 1000, 838 N.E.2d at 333. confession should not have been admitted because it was not sufficiently corroborated by . "[125] Thomas's statements directly address the Supreme Court's confusion on both present and future Federal Indian Policy. [39] Lara also argued that the Petite doctrine,[fn 11] if applied, would preclude his prosecution, and that since it was never applied to federal prosecutions following convictions in tribal court, it discriminated against Indians. Appellate Court of Illinois,Fourth District. [17], In 1990, the Supreme Court held in Duro v. Reina[18] that an Indian tribe did not have jurisdiction to try an Indian of another tribe. and C.A. 1092484. R.K. was available as a witness and answered all of defendants questions on cross-examination. about the matter. In Garcia-Cordova, the question was whether the child was available for cross-examination during defendants trial. 3d at 480, 912 N.E.2d at 291. The doctor testified that epileptics often remain confused for hours after a seizure. An alternative to lists of cases, the Precedent Map makes it easier to establish which ones may be of most relevance to your research and prioritise further reading. Code, 1239, subd. After several incidents of serious misconduct, the Spirit Lake Tribe issued an order excluding him from the reservation. You can explore additional available newsletters here. A doctor testified that Jason suffered from epilepsy, and at the time of the arrest, medications did not adequately control his condition. 3d at 484, 912 N.E.2d at 294. "[101] Thomas did not believe that Congress has the constitutional authority to set the "metes and bounds of tribal sovereignty. The second time J.O. "[116] Souter concluded that he would stand by the decisions made in Duro and Oliphant. [117], Lara was released from federal prison on August 19, 2005, about a year and four months after the Supreme Court delivered their decision.[118]. 3d at 1081, 909 N.E.2d at 400. Breyer noted the many shifts in federal Indian policy, from removal to self-determination, the last of which substantially relaxed prior restrictions that Congress had placed on the tribes. Compare the Epic of Gilgamesh withEnumaElish. A reversion can be used in a GRAT or GRUT to: (a) Remove trust property from a grantor's estate. According to the written statement, he said that on the first occasion, while J.O. United States Appellate Court of Illinois, 946 N.E.2d 516,349 Ill.Dec. He argues (1) the trial court should have excluded the testimony about J.O. Section 12 14.1(a)(1) of the Code states a defendant commits predatory criminal sexual assault of a child if *** the accused was 17 years of age or over and commits an act of sexual penetration with a victim who was under 13 years of age when the act was committed. 720 ILCS 5/12 14.1(a)(1) (West 2006). The judge also asked the jurors, in panels of four, whether they agreed with the presumption of innocence and the burden of proof. were alone together. According to her testimony, her roommate and babysitter, Dustin Plitus, watched R.K. and her brother while Kathleen was at work. Full Document, what is a case briefing of Illinois v. Lara The case brief should contain the following elements, -Case citation -Facts of the case -Procedural History -Issue(s) -Rule(s)/Holding(s) -Rationale, create a case brief of Illinois v. Lara (Ill. App. Court reverses both convictions of PCSA and relieves Lara of those charges. The defendant is Lara's son, who sleeps at her house. R.K. described conduct with which a typical four- or five-year-old child would not and should not be familiar. 3d 257, 932 N.E.2d 1052 (2010). mother. View [fn 9] Soon after, federal prosecutors charged Lara with assault on a federal officer[32] and a federal grand jury indicted him. After the arrest, Jason spent some hours locked in a cell. Lara pleaded guilty to the tribal charges, but claimed double jeopardy against the federal charges. She pushed his hand away and went back to sleep. The following morning, Augustina asked Cordero to talk to J.O. United States v. Lara - Wikipedia A grand jury indicted Jason on 11 separate counts for sex crimes against J.O., and prosecutors chose to try him on 2 counts of PCSA (720 ILCS 5/1214.1(a)(1) (West 2004)). [56] Olson noted that the legislative history of the Duro fix bill clearly indicated that Congress intended to restore, not delegate, authority to prosecute non-member Indians by a tribe. [fn 20][84] Congress has done both, such as in the withdrawal of federal recognition of the Menominee tribe with the Menominee Termination Act[85] in 1954, and the Menominee Restoration Act[86] to restore tribal recognition and powers. [89] Since the power exercised by the Spirit Lake Sioux Tribe was that of inherent tribal sovereignty, double jeopardy did not attach. *259Michael J. Pelletier, Gary R. Peterson, and Stuart H. Shiftman, all of State Appellate Defenders Office, of Springfield, for appellant. [408 Ill.App.3d 736] The court instructed the jurors that when they considered the testimony of any witness, they could take into account the witness's ability and opportunity to observe, his memory, his manner while testifying, any interest, bias or prejudice he may have, and the reasonableness of his testimony considered in the light of all the evidence in the case. The court did not instruct the jurors on the weight they should give statements made out of court, or factors to consider in assessing the credibility of children's statements. Lara was sentenced to 90 days in jail for the tribal offense. Lara had married a member of the Spirit Lake Santee tribe and had resided on the Spirit Lake Reservation with her and their children until he was banished from the reservation due to several serious misdemeanors. When asked what she called the part to which she pointed, she said [bjottom body. R.K. testified it was on the front of her body and that defendant had touched her on that part of her body. At trial, he denied any inappropriate behavior. 's disclosures. said no one else had ever touched her down there. Besides her mom and the people in the courtroom, she testified she had never told anyone else about what happened. The State only asked R.K. if defendant had touched her with anything beside his hand. 3d at 484, 912 N.E.2d at 294. According to Luckey, he had conducted between 30 and 50 interviews with children alleged to be victims of sexual or physical abuse. As we stated earlier, it is easy to see how R.K. would not equate oral sex with touching. Get free summaries of new Supreme Court of Illinois opinions delivered to your inbox! 's father. what is a case briefing of Illinois v. Lara The case brief was alone with Phillip. Founded over 20 years ago, vLex provides a first-class and comprehensive service for lawyers, law firms, government departments, and law schools around the world. What actually constitutes the corpus delicti of murder? stated defendant placed his mouth on her sex organ and licked inside her pee pee. A reasonable jury could properly have found RK.s statement credible. and C.A. We agree. Jason appealed his conviction, arguing that the State had failed to prove, the corpus delicti of the offense, because they had failed to present any evidence. this rule required the State to produce independent evidence of the elements of penetration [77] He noted that the intent of Congress was clear, not only based on the plain language of the statute, but also from its legislative history. [126] As Justice Souter stated in his dissent, this remains "an area peculiarly susceptible to confusion. Nam lacinia pulvinar tortor nec facilisis. 3d 467, 469, 727 N.E.2d 404, 406 (2000). may be used to prove the corpus delicti. Defense counsel chose to limit his cross-examination of R.K. Defense counsel did not ask her any questions about the alleged incident or any other incidents of inappropriate contact. According to the written statement, he said that on the first occasion, while J.O. She said she had never seen defendant do anything inappropriate to R.K. Which of the following examples would most likely be used in a short report? A. The State called R.K. as a witness. and C.A. statements and also testified at trial. [42], Lara appealed the denial of his motion to dismiss to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, arguing that the Tribal Court obtained its authority from the ICRA, an act of Congress, and that both the Tribal Court and the Federal Court derived their power from the same sovereign. No one at trial asked her directly if defendant licked her pee pee.). Fusce dui lectus, congue vel laoreet ac, dictum vitae odio. See Ill.S.Ct. Carey Kato, a forensic interviewer working for the Children's Advocacy Center, interviewed J.O. Based on testimony the court had heard at the trial, it found R.K.s prior statements were still reliable, even if they were inconsistent with her trial testimony. People v. Lara :: 2012 :: Supreme Court of Illinois Decisions inappropriately and inserted his finger in her vagina. Nam lacinia pulvinar tortor nec facilisis. 's father. People v. Curtis, 296 Ill. App. Fusce dui lectus, congue vel laoreet ac, dictum vitae odio. 126682 People State of Illinois, Appellee, v. Harold Blalock, Appellant. said that on two occasions about a month earlier, Jason had touched her private part.. Luckey then asked her about what happens when defendant licks her pee pee.. As for the alleged inconsistencies and contradictions, the jury obviously found her statements regarding the alleged conduct credible. grant of summary judgment on statute of limitations grounds was a decision on the merits and precluded class decertification. She was never asked this specific question by either the State or defendant. Indicate the negative externalities of firms, in their aim to After viewing the videos - interviews with Ibram X. Kendi discuss racism and anti-racism. First, explain your understan Violet Stapleton has been suffering from kidney disease for many years and has dialysis three times a week to survive. Want to read the entire page? An attorney is not required to, and indeed should not, make an argument not well-grounded in fact or law. slept at Shelley's home, where Shelley's son, Jason, also slept. Court: United States Appellate Court of Illinois: . Levels and degrees of crime, differences between misdemeanor and felony 4. were alone together. The Second District found the child was available for cross-examination. After the arrest, Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) officer Bryon Swan took Lara to the police station where Lara was informed of a Sioux order excluding him from the reservation. Jason signed a statement about the incident later that day. In June 2008, a grand jury indicted defendant, charging him with predatory criminal sexual assault for committing an act of sexual *260penetration on R.K. between July 13, 2007, and May 7, 2008. Defense counsel at both trial and on appeal provide a somewhat misleading representation of R.K.s testimony. whether his combined 18-year term for the two predatory criminal sexual abuse convictions [91] He did note that "we are not now faced with a question dealing with potential constitutional limits on congressional efforts to legislate far more radical changes in tribal status. Subscribers are able to see a list of all the cited cases and legislation of a document. He asked open-ended questions, which R.K. answered. He noted that the Indian tribes governed themselves since before Columbus arrived, and that most states never governed themselves outside of the United States. [69] Reichert stated that Duro was decided as a constitutional issue, not as a matter of common law, and it was the Court's place to determine the issue, not the place of Congress. [41] Senechal denied this motion, noting that Lara had shown no examples of other races not being prosecuted for like offenses. 110803, 944 N.E.2d 345 (Mar. The indictment alleged defendant placed his mouth on R.Ks vagina. A three-judge panel of the Circuit Court[fn 12] affirmed the decision of the District Court, holding that the tribe derived its power from its own retained sovereignty that was separate from the sovereignty of the United States. Jason testified that he never touched J.O. The judge admonished the venire about the principles that the jurors must presume the defendant's innocence, the State must prove the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the defendant has no duty to present any evidence, and the jurors must not hold against the defendant his exercise of his right not to testify.