First District Appellate Court Affirms Armed Violence Conviction, Rejecting the Defense Argument That He Can’t Be Convicted if He Didn’t Have a Gun When Arrested.

In this case, the police made an arrest of the defendant pursuant to the execution of a search warrant. The defendant did not have a gun in his possession when the police caught him. The defendant argued that this physical separation from the gun meant that he could not be convicted of armed violence.

The appellate court rejected this contention, noting that possessing a gun during a drug transaction presents a potentially violent situation that the armed violence statute is specifically designed to address. Therefore, the possession of the gun while possessing drugs with the intent to deliver establishes the defendant’s guilt, regardless of how quickly he threw away the gun as he fled from the police.

The appellate court, after having affirmed the armed violence conviction, vacated one of his possession with intent to deliver convictions under the one act one crime rule. They also modified the defendant’s fines and fees.

The case is People v. Jarrod Curry, 1-15-2616.

Related Posts
  • Number 10 of Bill Wolf’s “Top Ten” Fourth Amendment Cases for Illinois Lawyers: The Illinois Appellate Court Case of People v. McCavitt. Read More
  • U.S. Supreme Court Holds Defendants Sentenced on Mandatory Minimum Ineligible for Later Sentencing Reductions Based on Reduction in Guidelines Range. Read More
  • Seventh Circuit Orders Limited Remand in Light of United States v. Dean Read More