firearm violation in Illinois

2020Mr. Willingham argues both instructions were inadequate because they failed to specifically name the victim, Mr. Scott. ¶ 63 Jury instructions for attempted murder generally do not specify a victim’s name, “nor is there a place for the victim’s name in the Illinois Pattern Jury Instructions.” People v. Malone, 37 Ill.

2020Mr. Willingham argues both instructions were inadequate because they failed to specifically name the victim, Mr. Scott. 22 No. 1-16-2250 ¶ 63 Jury instructions for attempted murder generally do not specify a victim’s name, “nor is there a place for the victim’s name in the Illinois Pattern Jury Instructions.” People v. Malone, 37 Ill.

2015See People v. Guevara, 216 Ill. 2d 533, 542 (2005) (permitting the defendant to challenge for the first time on appeal the 15-year sentencing -4- 1-12-3519 enhancement for home invasion with a firearm as a violation of the proportionate penalties clause when compared to the sentence for another offense); People v. Wright, 194 Ill. 2d 1, 23 (2000) (permitting the defendant to challenge the constitutionality of a records keeping provision of the Vehicle Code for the first time on petition for rehearing).

2015See People v. Guevara, 216 Ill. 2d 533, 542 (2005) (permitting the defendant to challenge for the first time on appeal the 15-year sentencing enhancement for home invasion with a firearm as a violation of the proportionate penalties clause when compared to the sentence for another offense); People v. Wright, 194 Ill. 2d 1, 23 (2000) (permitting the defendant to challenge the constitutionality of a records keeping provision of the Illinois Vehicle Code for the first time on petition for rehearing).

2015See People v. Guevara, 216 Ill. 2d 533, 542 (2005) (permitting the defendant to challenge for the first time on appeal the 15-year sentencing -4- 1-12-3519 enhancement for home invasion with a firearm as a violation of the proportionate penalties clause when compared to the sentence for another offense); People v. Wright, 194 Ill. 2d 1, 23 (2000) (permitting the defendant to challenge the constitutionality of a records keeping provision of the Vehicle Code for the first time on petition for rehearing).

2015See People v. Guevara, 216 Ill. 2d 533, 542 (2005) (permitting the defendant to challenge for the first time on appeal the 15-year sentencing enhancement for home invasion with a firearm as a violation of the proportionate penalties clause when compared to the sentence for another offense); People v. Wright, 194 Ill. 2d 1, 23 (2000) (permitting the defendant to challenge the constitutionality of a records keeping provision of the Illinois Vehicle Code for the first time on petition for rehearing).

2025Id. ¶ 14 In this case, defendant was convicted of possessing a firearm in violation of subsections (a)(1), (a)(3)(A-5), and (a)(3)(C) of the AUUW statute.

2025Id. at 2156 . ¶ 13 Here, Norvell was convicted of possessing a firearm in violation of subsections (a)(1) and (a)(3)(C) of the AUUW statute.

2024People v. James, 163 Ill. 2d 302, 312 (1994); see also California v. Acevedo, 500 U.S. 565, 569 (1991). ¶ 28 The State contends that probable cause to arrest turned on Page possessing the extended magazine, not a firearm or standard magazine, which is unlawful in Cook County.

2024People v. James, 163 Ill. 2d 302, 312 (1994); see also California v. Acevedo, 500 U.S. 565, 569 (1991). ¶ 28 The State contends that probable cause to arrest turned on Page possessing the extended magazine, not a firearm or standard magazine, which is unlawful in Cook County.

2024Thus, the constitutionality of disarming felons extends to nonviolent felons. ¶ 85 We find that the regulated conduct under the AHC statute “falls beyond the Amendment’s original scope” because the scope of the second amendment reaches only “law- abiding citizens.” Bruen, 597 U.S. at 31-32 (“It is undisputed that petitioners Koch and Nash— two ordinary, law-abiding, adult citizens—are part of ‘the people’ whom the Second Amendment protects.”), People v. Baker, 2023 IL App (1st) 220328, ¶ 37 (“The Bruen Court could not have been more clear that its newly announced test applied only to laws that

2024App. 3d 322, 324 (1975) (“A bail bond violation occurs even if the underlying charge is later declared invalid.”); People v. Minefee, 14 Ill.

2024See 725 ILCS 5/32–10(a-5) (West 2020) (“Any person who knowingly violates a condition of bail bond by possessing a firearm in violation of his or her conditions of bail commits a Class 4 felony for a first violation and a Class 3 felony for a second or subsequent violation.”); see also cases discussing the criminal offense of violation of bail bond—People v. Tompkins, 26 Ill.

2024Thus, the constitutionality of disarming felons extends to nonviolent felons. ¶ 85 We find that the regulated conduct under the AHC statute “falls beyond the Amendment’s original scope” because the scope of the second amendment reaches only “law- abiding citizens.” Bruen, 597 U.S. at 31-32 (“It is undisputed that petitioners Koch and Nash— two ordinary, law-abiding, adult citizens—are part of ‘the people’ whom the Second Amendment protects.”), People v. Baker, 2023 IL App (1st) 220328, ¶ 37 (“The Bruen Court could not have been more clear that its newly announced test applied only to laws that

2014We reach this conclusion after reviewing the record, in particular, the sentencing hearing. ¶ 31 Defendant was convicted of six counts of armed robbery with a firearm in violation of section 18-2(a)(2) of the Criminal Code (720 ILCS 5/18-2(a)(2) (West 2012)) and, as a Class X offense, carries a sentencing range of 6 to 30 years’ imprisonment (720 ILCS 5/18-2(b) (West 2012); 730 ILCS 5/5-8-1(a)(3) (West 2008)). 1 In addition, armed robbery with a firearm carries a mandatory add-on penalty of 15 years’ imprisonment. 720 ILCS 5/18-2(b) (West 2012); see also People v. Blair, 2013 IL 114122, ¶¶ 27-