Court Opinion

ID: 9779816
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-30 00:48:11.360632+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:33:41.746079
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE APPLETON, specially concurring: I concur with the majority’s decision but write separately to address both a specific argument made during oral arguments as well as to further comment on the problem created by Lovell’s opening statement. At oral argument, the Health Center’s counsel encouraged this court to reverse based on our court’s recent decision in Downey v. Dunnington, 384 Ill. App. 3d 350, 895 N.E.2d 271 (2008). The difficulty in resting the argument on that slender reed is that while the disposition criticized counsel’s improper elicitation of irrelevant character evidence, we did not reverse the verdict in favor of the defendant on appeal. I agree with the majority that Lovell’s counsel here abused the opportunity for opening statement. Had counsel made this argument in a law school class in trial advocacy, he would have received a failing grade. That defense counsel made a tactical decision to neither object to the improper argument nor move for a mistrial during Lovell’s opening statement does not excuse the requirement to do so if the error is to be preserved for review.