People v. Davis

62 Citing cases

  1. People v. Garvin

    2013 Ill. App. 113095 (Ill. App. Ct. 2013)   Cited 34 times
    In Garvin, this court looked at its previous decision in Davis and determined that under either rational basis review or intermediate scrutiny, the UUWF and AHC statutes are constitutional.

    Garvin contends the prohibition is not sufficiently narrowly tailored. ¶ 36 Garvin further argues that even if we were to apply intermediate scrutiny as the court did in People v. Davis, 408 Ill.App.3d 747, 349 Ill.Dec. 799, 947 N.E.2d 813 (2011), we should find the statute violates the second amendment. Garvin argues a prohibition against the mere possession of ammunition inside an individual's own home does not rise to the level of circumstances that warrant an infringement on the individual's second amendment rights under any level of heightened scrutiny.

  2. People v. Robinson

    2011 Ill. App. 100078 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012)   Cited 13 times
    Determining that “the mere fact that the handgun defendant possessed in this case was recovered from inside his own home does not warrant departing from our previous decisions finding the [UUWF statute] constitutional”

    ¶ 10 Defendant contends we should declare the unlawful use of a weapon by a felon statute unconstitutional and vacate his conviction under that statute, because it violates his right to bear arms as embodied by the second amendment to the United States Constitution. ¶ 11 Although defendant recognizes we have previously found both the aggravated unlawful use of a weapon by a felon (AUUW) statute and the unlawful use of a weapon by a felon statute constitutional in contexts where a defendant has been convicted of possession of a weapon outside the confines of his home (see, e.g., People v. Davis, 408 Ill.App.3d 747, 349 Ill.Dec. 799, 947 N.E.2d 813 (2011); People v. Dawson, 403 Ill.App.3d 499, 343 Ill.Dec. 274, 934 N.E.2d 598 (2010)), defendant correctly notes we have not specifically addressed the constitutionality of the UUW statute in the context where a defendant is convicted of possession of a weapon recovered from inside his home. ¶ 12 Although defendant did not challenge the statute's constitutionality in the trial court, a constitutional challenge to a statute may be raised at any time.

  3. People v. Robinson

    2011 Ill. App. 100078 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011)

    ¶ 10 Defendant contends we should declare the unlawful use of a weapon by a felon statute unconstitutional and vacate his conviction under that statute, because it violates his right to bear arms as embodied by the second amendment to the United States Constitution. ¶ 11 Although defendant recognizes we have previously found both the aggravated unlawful use of a weapon by a felon (AUUW) statute and the unlawful use of a weapon by a felon statute constitutional in contexts where a defendant has been convicted of possession of a weapon outside the confines of his home (see, e.g., People v. Davis, 408 Ill. App. 3d 747 (2011); People v. Dawson, 403 Ill. App. 3d 499 (2010)), defendant correctly notes we have not specifically addressed the constitutionality of the UUW statute in the context where a defendant is convicted of possession of a weapon recovered from inside his home. ¶ 12 Although defendant did not challenge the statute's constitutionality in the trial court, a constitutional challenge to a statute may be raised at any time.

  4. People v. Montgomery

    2016 Ill. App. 142143 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016)   Cited 9 times
    Finding the armed habitual criminal statute to be constitutional under either rational basis or intermediate scrutiny

    ¶ 17 Although the second amendment does not categorically exclude felons from its protection, this court has found that laws prohibiting felons from possessing firearms does no run afoul of the second amendment. Thus, we find unconvincing defendant's reliance on People v. Davis, 408 Ill.App.3d 747, 349 Ill.Dec. 799, 947 N.E.2d 813 (2011). In Davis, the defendant made facial and as-applied constitutional challenges to the UUWF and AHC statutes.

  5. People v. Spencer

    2012 Ill. App. 102094 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012)   Cited 158 times
    Finding even if the defendant had made a procedurally proper as-applied constitutional challenge to the unlawful use of a weapon by a felon statute, the court would still reject his claims where the unlawful use of a weapon by a felon statute does not include an exception for persons convicted of nonviolent felonies and neither Heller nor McDonald recognized such an exception

    The purpose of this statute is to protect the public from the danger posed by convicted felons possessing firearms. Robinson, 2011 IL App (1st) 100078, ¶ 19, 357 Ill.Dec. 872, 964 N.E.2d 551; Aguilar, 408 Ill.App.3d at 146, 348 Ill.Dec. 575, 944 N.E.2d 816; People v. Davis, 408 Ill.App.3d 747, 750, 349 Ill.Dec. 799, 947 N.E.2d 813 (2011) ; People v. Crawford, 145 Ill.App.3d 318, 321, 99 Ill.Dec. 290, 495 N.E.2d 1025 (1986). ¶ 29 The defendant cites Heller and McDonald in support of his claim that the UUW statute violates his second amendment right because it precludes him from possessing a firearm within his home for the purpose of self-defense.

  6. People v. Wilkins

    2021 IL App (1st) 181286 (Ill. App. Ct. 2021)

    ¶ 46 Finally, defendant contends that multiple convictions for the simultaneous possession of multiple firearms are not permitted under the armed habitual criminal statute; one of the two convictions must be vacated. Defendant cites to People v. Davis, 408 Ill. App. 3d 747, 752 (2011), to support his contention. Citing People v. Artis, 232 Ill. 2d 156, 170 (2009), defendant argues that the case should be remanded back to the trial court to determine which conviction should stand as the sentencing error violates the second prong of plain error. ¶ 47 The State agrees that the sentence, as it stands, is improper and seeks to have this court correct the mittimus pursuant to its authority under Illinois Supreme Court Rule 615(b)(1) (eff.

  7. People v. Picazzo

    2017 Ill. App. 151139 (Ill. App. Ct. 2017)

    See, e.g., Rush, 2014 IL App (1st) 123462, ¶ 23; Garvin, 2013 IL App (1st) 113095, ¶ 23. ¶ 25 Defendant argues that in People v. Davis, 408 Ill. App. 3d 747 (2011), this court suggested that the right of felons to possess weapons could be protected under the second amendment. However, defendant fails to acknowledge that even though Davis held the defendant was not excluded from second amendment protection due to his felon status, the Davis court went on to find that the UUWF and armed habitual criminal statutes were constitutional both on their face and as applied to the defendant, relying on the dicta in Heller and McDonald.

  8. People v. Jackson

    2014 Ill. App. 120320 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014)

    ¶ 15 Our review of the constitutionality of a statute is de novo. People v. Davis, 408 Ill. App. 3d 747, 749 (2011). A challenge to the constitutionality of a criminal statute may be raised for the first time on appeal.

  9. People v. Charles

    2014 Ill. App. 112869 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014)

    Our review of the constitutionality of a statute is de novo. People v. Davis, 408 Ill. App. 3d 747, 749 (2011). ¶ 14 Defendant pled guilty to the following charge as written in the charging instrument: "In that he, knowingly carried in a vehicle a firearm, at a time when he was not on his own land or in his own abode or fixed place of business and the firearm was uncased, loaded

  10. People v. Charles

    2014 Ill. App. 112869 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014)

    Our review of the constitutionality of a statute is de novo. People v. Davis, 408 Ill. App. 3d 747, 749 (2011). ¶ 13 Defendant pled guilty to the following charge as written in the charging instrument: "In that he, knowingly carried in a vehicle a firearm, at a time when he was not on his own land or in his own abode or fixed place of business and the firearm was uncased, loaded and immediately accessible at the time of the offense, and he has previously been convicted of a felony, to wit: Murder, under case number 84 C 6827, in violation of Chapter 720 Act 5 Section 24-1.6(a)(1)/(3)(a) of the Illinois Compiled Statutes 2000 as amended."