People v. Felton

14 Citing cases

  1. People v. Ablahad

    2021 Ill. App. 180499 (Ill. App. Ct. 2021)

    "Such evidence is generally inadmissible because it carries an extreme risk of prejudice in that it can lead to 'the jury convicting a defendant because he or she is a bad person deserving punishment.'" People v. Felton, 2019 IL App (3d) 150595, ¶ 42 (quoting Donoho, 204 Ill.2d at 170). Other-crimes evidence is admissible for other purposes," 'such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident.'

  2. People v. Dailey

    2021 Ill. App. 200916 (Ill. App. Ct. 2021)

    ¶ 57 In addition, when issuing its findings the trial court very clearly stated that it did not consider the victims' testimony as it related to the identity of the defendant as he appeared in the CTA still images. See People v. Felton, 2019 IL App (3d) 150595, ¶ 47 ("Unlike a jury, a trial judge is presumed to know the law and to apply it correctly."). Instead, the trial court stressed the importance of the victims' in-court identifications of defendant along with their independent identifications of him in the photo arrays.

  3. People v. K.A. (In re K.A.)

    2023 Ill. App. 4th 230341 (Ill. App. Ct. 2023)

    ¶ 119 The trial court is presumed to know the law and use evidence only for its proper limited purpose (People v. Felton, 2019 IL App (3d) 150595, ¶ 48, 123 N.E.3d 1118), and nothing in the record shows that the court improperly considered the hearsay testimony. Further, because of the strength of the State's case against respondent (see supra ¶ 96), the worst that could be said of the admission of this hearsay testimony was that it amounted to harmless error.

  4. People v. Gaines

    2019 Ill. App. 3d 160494 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019)   Cited 1 times

    His projected discharge date is May 13, 2019. See People v. Felton , 2019 IL App (3d) 150595, ¶ 80, 429 Ill.Dec. 59, 123 N.E.3d 1118 (we may take judicial notice of the public records appearing on the Illinois Department of Corrections website).--------

  5. People v. Reed

    2025 Ill. App. 231194 (Ill. App. Ct. 2025)

    Moreover, as the State argues, a trial judge (as here), unlike a jury, is presumed to know the law and apply it correctly. See People v. Felton, 2019 IL App (3d) 150595, ¶ 48. Defendant has provided nothing (nor do we find anything in the record) to counter that presumption.

  6. People v. Williams

    2024 Ill. App. 5th 230418 (Ill. App. Ct. 2024)

    "In addition, the risk of prejudice from other-crimes evidence is lessened in a bench trial. See People v. Felton, 2019 IL App (3d) 150595, ¶¶ 47-48 (noting that the prejudicial effect of other-crimes evidence 'is almost exclusively discussed in terms of impact on a jury' (emphasis in original) and explaining that the law 'presumes that a judge, unlike a jury, is not likely to find a defendant guilty simply because he or she is a bad person deserving punishment'); cf. People v. Johnson, 296 Ill.App.3d 53, 63 (1998) (in resolving a challenge to the admission of the minor victim's hearsay statement in an aggravated criminal sexual assault case, stating that '[w]hile a technical error may have been committed, we cannot see how, in this bench trial, it caused any prejudice to the defendant')." Id. ¶ 20 In this matter, a trial judge conducted the bench trial and rendered the verdict.

  7. People v. Beal

    2023 Ill. App. 3d 220461 (Ill. App. Ct. 2023)   Cited 1 times

    Instead, it would only encourage the jury to impermissibly convict defendant because" 'he *** is a bad person deserving punishment.'" People v. Felton, 2019 IL App (3d) 150595, ¶ 42 (quoting Donoho, 204 Ill.2d at 170).

  8. People v. Williams

    2023 Ill. App. 221028 (Ill. App. Ct. 2023)

    Conversely, the risk of undue prejudice accompanying the admission of other-crimes evidence is, in general, significantly diminished where the trier of fact is a judge rather than a jury. People v. Felton, 2019 IL App (3d) 150595, ¶ 47. Furthermore, in arguing against the admission of other crimes evidence, Sandoval argued that defendant could be prejudiced by the jury hearing such evidence.

  9. People v. Adams

    2023 Ill. App. 2d 220061 (Ill. App. Ct. 2023)   Cited 10 times

    In addition, the risk of prejudice from other-crimes evidence is lessened in a bench trial. See People v. Felton, 2019 IL App (3d) 150595, ¶¶ 47-48 (noting that the prejudicial effect of other-crimes evidence "is almost exclusively discussed in terms of impact on a jury" (emphasis in original) and explaining that the law "presumes that a judge, unlike a jury, is not likely to find a defendant guilty simply because he or she is a bad person deserving punishment"); cf. People v. Johnson, 296 Ill.App.3d 53, 63 (1998) (in resolving a challenge to the admission of the minor victim's hearsay statement in an aggravated criminal sexual assault case, stating that "[w]hile a technical error may have been committed, we cannot see how, in this bench trial, it caused any prejudice to the defendant").

  10. People v. Castillo

    2023 Ill. App. 3d 220034 (Ill. App. Ct. 2023)

    See People v. Felton, 2019 IL App (3d) 150595, ¶ 48. Nothing in the record rebuts this presumption.