Jump to content

People vs Kent


Ol'Coach

Recommended Posts

Couldn't find my original post, so starting anew...

 

My local case challenging the constitutionality of the Illinois FOID card Act has been continued at the State's request. The new date is Feb. 4, 2011 at 9:30 A.M. in Courtroom "E". (Urbana)

 

Thank you for your interest.

 

Paul

 

 

Here's the case; type in 10cm000701

 

People vs Kent

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Couldn't find my original post, so starting anew...

 

My local case challenging the constitutionality of the Illinois FOID card Act has been continued at the State's request. The new date is Feb. 4, 2011 at 9:30 A.M. in Courtroom "E". (Urbana)

 

Thank you for your interest.

 

Paul

 

 

Here's the case; type in 10cm000701

 

People vs Kent

 

Thanks. I used your links and looked it up. An interesting thing is Tracy Kent is a defendant in a criminal case (bear arms, but no FOID permission from government), not a civil case. I wish him/her (not sure) the best of luck. I don't know any details of the case. Are there court documents and other stuff anywhere that we can read? More links?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not quite ready to get on this one with both feet and I'll tell you why:

 

The defendant had an expired FOID card. He now has a new, valid FOID card. Common sense would dictate that rational, thoughtful minds over at the SAs office are going to come to their senses and over-rule whoever over there has a big <ahem> for this guy and continues this prosecution even though it doesn't serve justice or the public good.

 

I look for the charges to be dropped sooner or later, rendering this a moot case that won't make it to the USSC.

 

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 7 months later...

This public record......... Regards, Dan

 

06-25-10 Charge 01 Count 001 FIREARM W/O VALID FOID/ELIG Statute 430 65/2(a)(1) Class A Orig. Agency: CHAMPAIGN COUNTY SHERIFF Charge Instr: Information NO BOND No Bond Cause set for arraignment on Created and properly labeled court case file. Defendant arraigned. On Defendant's motion, cause is continued for appearance of counsel. Defendant is admonished as to trial and sentencing in absentia. See expanded record. Bond is to continue. Bond Type Cash 10% deposit Bond Sheriff Booking Fee Notice of arrest without warrant on file. 07-09-10 Defendant makes second motion for continuance to obtain counsel. Motion allowed. Bond to continue.

 

07-23-10 Defendant makes second motion for continuance to obtain counsel. Motion allowed. Bond to continue. See expanded record.

 

08-06-10 Motion by the Defendant for court appointed counsel. Motion allowed. Champaign County Public Defender is appointed and appears instanter. Plea of not guilty entered and Defendant requests trial by jury. Defendant is admonished as to trial and sentencing in absentia. Bond to continue. See expanded record.

 

08-18-10 Proof of service of discovery materials filed.

 

09-01-10 Appearance of the State's Attorney. Defendant appears personally and by Counsel. Motion by the Defendant for Continuance. Motion allowed. Cause reallotted for the trial term immediately following the pre-trial date. PD APPOINTMENT IS VACATED.

 

09-13-10 Affidavit of mailing of Discovery Materials filed.

 

10-08-10 Allotted for trial Appearance of the State's Attorney. Defendant appears personally and by Counsel.

 

10-18-10 People appear by Andrea I. Bergstrom. Appearance of Paul Vallandigham on behalf of the Defendant. No appearance by Defendant as previously ordered by the Court. Motion by People for bond forfeiture and warrant. Objection by counsel for Defendant. Motion is allowed. Defendant's bond is forfeited. Warrant issued with bond set in the amount of $ 10,000.00. Circuit clerk to send notice of bond forfeiture hearing. Motion to Declare Statute Unconstitutional filed. Motion to Continue filed.

 

10-20-10 Bond forfeiture notice prepared and mailed. 10-22-10 Appearance of the People by KATIE PUGH. Defendant appears personally and with counsel, PAUL VALLANDIGHAM. Cause called for hearing on Defendant's Motion to Quash Warrant. There being no objection by the People, the Motion is allowed. The warrant issued October 18, 2010 is vacated. Bond forfeiture hearing scheduled for November 16, 2010 at 8:30 a.m. is vacated. Cause is continued for hearing on the Motion to Declare Statute Unconstitutional and status hearing on November 12, 2010 at 9:30 a.m. in Courtroom E. Defendant is ordered to appear on that date. Defendant is admonished as to proceedings in absentia. Prior Order for bond forfeiture and for issuance of Prior Order for bond forfeiture vacated. Bond forfeiture hearing vacated. Warrant Quashed Warrant quashed

 

11-03-10 Copy of Quashed Warrant filed 11-12-10 Allotted for trial Appearance of the State's Attorney. Defendant appears personally and by Counsel.

 

12-16-10 Appearance of the State's Attorney. Defendant appears personally and by Counsel. Motion by the Defendant for Continuance. Motion allowed. Cause reallotted for the trial term immediately following the pre-trial date. Motion for Continuance on file.

 

02-04-11 People appear by Marley Nelson. Defendant appears personally and with Paul Vallandingham. Bond to continue.

 

03-03-11 Matter allotted for trial and trial scheduling People appear by M.Nelson. Defendant appears with P.Vallandigham. Cause called for jury trial. Potential jurors are summoned into court and are sworn. Jurors are selected and are sworn. Opening arguments heard. Evidence heard on behalf of the people. People rest. Evidence heard on behalf of the defendant. Defendant rests.Jury instruction conference held. Cause continued for jury trial on 3/4/11 at 9:30 am in courtroom E.

 

03-04-11 Cause continued for sentencing to People appear by M.Nelson. Defendant appears by P.Vallandigham. Cause called for trial. Closing arguments heard. Jurors are instructed as to the law. Jurors retire to deliberate. Officer informs the Court that the jurors have reached a verdict. Verdict is read into open court as follows," We the Jury, find the defendant, guilty." Cause is continued for sentencing hearing on 4/18/11 at 11:00 am in courtroom E. Order for Sentencing Report on file this date. See Order. Record of exhibits received on file.

 

04-04-11 Post-Trial Motions filed.

 

04-11-11 Misdemeanor reports on file.

 

04-18-11 Cause continued for sentencing to People appear by M.Nelson. Defendant appears with P.Vallandigham. Cause called for sentencing hearing. Motion by the defendant to continue is granted. Cause continued for sentencing and post trial motions on 5/4/11 at 1:30 pm in courtroom E.

 

05-04-11 Disposition 01/00 Count 001 Fine + Cost Disposition: Guilty FIREARM W/O VALID FOID/ELIG Disposition Type: Guilty Plea Defendant Plea: Guilty Statute 430 65/2(a)(1) Class A Orig. Sentence: 05/04/2011 Sentence: Fines and/or Cost/Penalties and Fees Fine + Cost 897.00 E-CITATION 5.00 CRIME STOPPERS 5.00 Payment Due Appearance of the People by Marley C. Nelson. Appearance of the Defendant personally and by counsel, Paul Vallandigham. Cause called for sentencing hearing. Statements of counsel heard. Statement of the defendant heard. All financial obligations shall be paid in equal monthly installments to the Champaign County Circuit Clerk by . Any bond posted is to be applied first to any court ordered bond assignment on file and then to all restitution ordered and then to all financial obligations in this case. Any remaining bond shall be discharged to the individual who posted the bond. Brief in Support of Defendant's Post-Trial Motions on file.

 

05-10-11 Bond 06-03-11 Notice of Appeal on file be Defendant/Appellant, by his Attorney, Paul H. Vallandigham.

 

06-06-11 Appeal Affidavit was mailed.

 

06-24-11 Order from the Appellate Court re: 4-11-0481 I have today entered the following order of the Court in the above entitled cause: "Appellant ruled to show cause, on or before 06/30/11, why appeal should not be dismissed for failure to file docketing statement as required by Rule 312. Failure to comply with this Rule will result in dismissal of appeal on file."

 

08-02-11 Court Ordered Payments 08-05-11 Appeal prepared for appellate court this date.

 

08-09-11 Sent letter to Appellate Court re: appeal fees not paid. Certificate of mailing prepared.

 

08-19-11 Order from the Appellate Court re: 4-11-0481 'Appellant rule to show cause, on or before 8/24/11, why appeal should not be dismissed for failure to file record on appeal as required by Rule 326. Failure to comply with this Rule will result in dismissal of appeal." On file.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Defendants attorney screwed up the appeal. Fantastic... This is exactly what Gura has warned about. You need the right lawyers and the right parties or you end up with bad case law.

 

If true, it the ruling wouldn't be precendential anyway as it wasn't in an appeals court...right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Defendants attorney screwed up the appeal. Fantastic... This is exactly what Gura has warned about. You need the right lawyers and the right parties or you end up with bad case law.

 

If true, it the ruling wouldn't be precendential anyway as it wasn't in an appeals court...right?

 

Thankfully if this case gets denied on appeal due the lawyer's incompetence, the case has no effect at all. See illinois supreme court rule 23(e)(1).

 

edited: "no effect" not "so effect"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Defendants attorney screwed up the appeal. Fantastic... This is exactly what Gura has warned about. You need the right lawyers and the right parties or you end up with bad case law.

 

 

Everybody wants to be a hero in the gun rights arena. As usual, it's best left to those that have the cases, the knowledge and the expertise to handle it the right way the first time!! It's an uphill battle anyway, why fight it with one or both hands tied behind your back??

 

AB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect the defendant may have just run out of money.

 

I am not real sure but it looks like the fine he was assesed was minimal and it would probably cost far more to appeal than what the penalty for the infraction was.

 

Since it never got appealed it does not make any real difference, does it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect the defendant may have just run out of money.

 

I am not real sure but it looks like the fine he was assesed was minimal and it would probably cost far more to appeal than what the penalty for the infraction was.

 

Since it never got appealed it does not make any real difference, does it?

 

The case WAS appealed, the attorney just didn't follow the rules of the appellate court procedure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has no one read the information regarding this case on the other thread?

 

Here's the deal.

 

The defendant was fined $500.

 

He doesn't want to spend several thousand dollars, but instead would prefer to pay the fine and be done with it.

 

If someone would like to write out a big, fat check on this to proceed to the Appellate court, then by all means, have at it. $5000 would probably get it started. $15k more might finish it.

 

However, I suspect it's going nowhere for the time being.

 

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...