Skip to content

People v. Hibbler, 2021 WL 4772794 (Ill. App. 2021)

Case (cite)
People v. Hibbler, 2021 WL 4772794 (Ill. App. 2021)
Year
2021
State
Illinois
Type of proceeding
Appellate
Type of claim
Evidentiary; Ineffective assistance of counsel
Expert evidence ruling reversing or affirming on appeal:
Admitted
What was the ruling?
Correct to Admit
Type of evidence at issue:
Firearms identification
Defense or Prosecution Expert
Prosecution
Name of expert(s) who were the subject of the ruling
Dustin Johnson
Summary of reasons for ruling
The appellate court affirmed in part, concluding (1) the State proved defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt; (2) the trial court did not err when it permitted Detective Klein to provide lay opinion testimony; however, the court erred when it permitted Detective Klein to provide improper lay opinion identification testimony, but the evidence was not closely balanced; and (3) trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to file a motion to sever the charges. The appellate court vacated defendant's term of mandatory supervised release for unlawful use of a weapon by a felon and remanded with directions.
The jurisdiction’s standard for expert admissibility at the time – list all that apply: (Frye), (Daubert), (Post-2000 Rule 702), (Other)
N/A
Did lower court hold a hearing
N/A
Names of prosecution expert(s) two testified at hearing
Dustin Johnson
Names of defense expert(s) who testified at hearing (or None).
None
Discussion of 2009 NAS Report (NAS2009) or PCAST report (PCAST)
N
Discussion of error rates / reliability
N
Frye Ruling
N
Limiting testimony ruling
N
Language imposed by court to limit testimony
N/A
Ruling based in prior precedent / judicial notice
N
Daubert ruling emphasizing – which factors – (list 1-5)
N/A
Ruling on qualifications of expert
N
Ruling on 702(a) – the expert will help / assist the jury
N
Ruling on 702(b) – the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data
N
Ruling on 702(c) – the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods
N
Ruling on 702(d) – reliable application of principles and methods to the facts of the case
N

Notes

The expert testimony on firearms identification was not in dispute in this case. This case centered around lay opinion testimony for an unrelated issue,