Court Opinion

ID: 9964043
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-26 20:04:54.677247+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:25:08.793975
License: Public Domain

2024 IL App (1st) 220918-U
                                             No. 1-22-0918
                                       Order filed April 26, 2024

                                                                                          Sixth Division
 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and is not precedent except in the
 limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1).
 ______________________________________________________________________________
                                                IN THE
                                  APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS
                                           FIRST DISTRICT
 ______________________________________________________________________________
 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,                             )   Appeal from the Circuit Court
                                                                  )   of Cook County, Illinois.
           Plaintiff-Appellee,                                    )
                                                                  )
     v.                                                           )   No. 16 CR 17166
                                                                  )
 TIERA GRAVES,                                                    )   The Honorable
                                                                  )   Stanley J. Sacks,
           Defendant-Appellant.                                   )   Judge, Presiding.

           JUSTICE C.A. WALKER delivered the judgment of the court.
           Presiding Justice Oden Johnson and Justice Hyman concurred in the judgment.

                                               ORDER

¶1        Held: We reverse defendant’s first-degree murder conviction where the State failed to
                disprove beyond a reasonable doubt that she acted in self-defense.

¶2        Tiera Graves was found guilty of first-degree murder and sentenced to 28 years in prison.

On appeal, Graves argues: (1) the State failed to disprove beyond a reasonable doubt that she acted

in self-defense or, alternatively, her conviction should be reduced to second-degree murder; (2)

the circuit court erroneously excluded evidence at trial in violation of her right to present a defense;
No. 1-22-0918

(3) the prosecutor made improper remarks during closing arguments; (4) the court failed to ensure

the jurors understood that she is presumed innocent of the charges; and (5) her 28-year sentence is

excessive. For the following reasons, we reverse Graves’s conviction.

¶3                                         I. BACKGROUND

¶4      Tiera Graves was charged with multiple counts of first-degree murder in the fatal shooting

of Marilyn Duffie. 1 Following a jury trial, Graves was found guilty of murder and sentenced to 30

years’ imprisonment. Graves’s sentence was reduced to 28 years after reconsideration.

¶5      Prior to trial, Graves filed a motion seeking to admit certified copies of Duffie’s prior

convictions for assault and battery and the testimony of Duffie’s mother, Delores Rogers, who was

the complainant involved in Duffie’s battery conviction. The court allowed the admission of the

convictions but precluded Rogers from testifying about the battery conviction. Graves also filed a

motion in limine to admit a recording of a 9-1-1 call she made on the day of the shooting. The

court excluded the 9-1-1 recording as inadmissible hearsay.

¶6      At the jury trial, several witnesses provided their account of events surrounding the

shooting. Graves testified that in October 2016, she lived on the second floor of the Concordia

Apartments with her son and cousin, Duffie, who had been staying with her for two months. Duffie

was homeless before she moved in with Graves, and Graves allowed Duffie to live with her until

Duffie became self-sufficient. At some point, Graves and Duffie began arguing about Duffie

bringing men into the apartment. On October 18, 2016, Graves found a used condom in the hallway

of her apartment while she and her son were unloading groceries and confronted Duffie about it

        1
          Decedent’s last name appears as “Duffie” and “Duffy” throughout the record. We refer to decedent as
“Duffie” as it appears in the indictment.

                                                    -2-
No. 1-22-0918

over text message. Duffie called Graves yelling and spewing foul names, and Graves told Duffie

to calm down. When Graves arrived at her apartment door, she realized Duffie locked her out.

Graves called Duffie, and Duffie opened the door but blocked Graves from walking through the

doorway. Duffie eventually moved “over a little,” and Graves squeezed passed Duffie into the

apartment. Graves walked into the kitchen as Duffie followed behind her telling Graves to stop

treating her like a child. Graves kept her distance and told Duffie to calm down. Duffie attempted

to push Graves, and Graves walked around the kitchen island for safety. Duffie then pulled out a

knife and stated she was going to show Graves that she was not a child. Graves told Duffie to leave

and called the police. Graves then called Rogers, Duffie’s mother, to “come and get [Duffie].”

¶7     Graves indicated Duffie left the apartment but came back using her apartment key. Graves

was standing at the door entrance at that time and asked Duffie to return the key. Duffie punched

a hole in the apartment wall and followed Graves into the kitchen, where they continued to argue

across the counter. Duffie punched the fish tank, causing water, rocks, and fish to spill onto the

floor, then left the apartment. Graves locked the apartment door and called her grandmother,

Eleanor Webster. Thereafter, Graves heard Duffie tugging at the door. Graves went to the door

and told Duffie the police were on their way and she needed to leave. Duffie had a stick in her

hand and stated she was going to mess up Graves’s car. Duffie left again and Graves sat down and

waited for the police. Sometime later, Duffie came back to the apartment with two men. Graves

grabbed her gun and put it on her waistband. Graves then went back to the door and told Duffie

she needed to leave. Duffie stood at the door, holding a stick in her hand and beating and kicking

the doorframe. Duffie eventually left, and Graves continued to wait for the police. About 10

                                               -3-
No. 1-22-0918

minutes later, Graves went downstairs to talk with Duffie about damaging her car. Graves carried

her gun with her because she was scared.

¶8     Graves testified she went to LaShay McCoy’s apartment located on the first floor and asked

for Duffie. Duffie exited McCoy’s apartment, and Graves told Duffie not to damage her car.

Pulling the apartment keys out of her purse, Duffie stated that the car was the least of Graves’s

worries, and the two began arguing again. Graves tried to get Duffie to “go talk about it,” but

Duffie again threatened to mess with Graves’s car. At one point, Graves dropped her cell phone

and asked a neighbor nearby, Sharon Coleman, to hold it. Coleman gave the phone back to Graves

and closed her apartment door. Graves and Duffie continued arguing. Graves then realized “there’s

no getting to [Duffie]” and began to walk away. As Graves walked up the stairs, she felt Duffie

“grab me, wrestling me, pulling me towards her.” Graves then grabbed her firearm and fired one

shot at Duffie. According to Graves, she was scared for her life in that moment and believed she

could be stabbed to death because Duffie was armed with the knife she had waved at Graves earlier.

Graves then went upstairs, put down the gun, and sat on the couch. When the police arrived, Graves

was mopping the spilled water from the fish tank. Graves told the officer where the gun was located

and she was arrested. Graves testified that she was aware of Duffie’s prior convictions for battery

and assault. Graves believed she was defending herself and that it was necessary to shoot Duffie

to prevent her death.

¶9     Rogers testified Duffie called her on the day of the shooting. Duffie sounded upset, and

Rogers told her to leave the apartment. Rogers then received a call from Graves. Graves told

Rogers that “she was going to shoot [Duffie]” if “[Duffie] ran up on her” meaning “[i]f she get in

                                               -4-
No. 1-22-0918

her face.” Rogers advised Graves to walk away and talk about the issue when Graves and Duffie

calm down. The call then ended abruptly. Later, Graves called Rogers and stated, “I shot her.”

¶ 10   McCoy testified she lived on the first floor of the Concordia Apartments on the day of the

shooting. That evening, McCoy was in her apartment when she heard individuals arguing upstairs.

She looked outside and saw a group of people looking toward Graves’s apartment. Duffie then

came to her apartment asking for peroxide for an injury to her knuckles. Moments later, Graves

came to McCoy’s apartment asking for Duffie to come out and talk. Duffie left McCoy’s apartment

and an argument ensued between Duffie and Graves. McCoy closed her door and heard a gunshot

about five minutes later. When McCoy opened the door, Graves was walking back to her apartment

and Duffie was on the ground. McCoy did not see Duffie with a weapon but did see her carrying

a purse.

¶ 11   Sharon Coleman testified she lived on the first floor of the Concordia Apartments with her

daughter, Zantrea Coleman, and her daughter’s boyfriend. On the day of the shooting, Sharon saw

Graves and Duffie arguing in front of her apartment. Sharon watched the argument and did not see

anything in Graves’s or Duffie’s hands. After several minutes, Sharon closed her door and then

heard a gunshot. Sharon opened her door and saw Graves walking up the stairs, while Duffie

walked toward the parking lot holding her chest, then fell to the ground. Sharon did not see any

weapons in Graves’s or Duffie’s hands but did see Duffie with a purse.

¶ 12   Zantrea testified that she also saw Graves and Duffie arguing both on the second floor and

in front of her door. Neither Graves nor Duffie had anything in their hands but Graves had a bulge

in the back of her waist. Shortly after Sharon closed their door, Zantrea heard a gunshot. When

they opened the door, Duffie was holding her chest and stated, “Oh my God, this bitch shot me.”

                                              -5-
No. 1-22-0918

Duffie was wearing a closed purse. Zantrea called the police and went to the parking lot where

Duffie was lying.

¶ 13   Khalil Harris testified that he saw two women arguing when he arrived at McCoy’s

apartment on the day of the shooting. He watched the argument for a few minutes then went to

McCoy’s apartment. Duffie came to the apartment to clean her hand; Graves arrived a few minutes

later. After Graves and Duffie left the apartment, Harris heard a gunshot.

¶ 14   Causha Mosely testified that she was working as security at the Concordia Apartments on

the day of the shooting. She heard a gunshot while she was in the office, then went to the dispatched

location. When she arrived, Mosely saw a woman lying on the ground. Chicago police officer

Jason Toliver testified he and his partner were dispatched to Concordia Apartments. When they

arrived, Duffie was lying on the ground. After speaking with several people, Toliver and his partner

went to a second-floor apartment. Toliver saw Graves mopping up blood, water, and rocks spilled

from an aquarium or fish tank. Toliver and his partner entered, spoke with a man sitting on the

couch, and asked Graves where the gun was located. Graves directed them to a closet by the door,

and Toliver saw a gun on the closet shelf.

¶ 15   Dr. Ponni Arunkumar testified she conducted Duffie’s autopsy. She concluded Duffie’s

cause of death was a gunshot wound to the chest. The course of the gunshot was front to back,

right to left, and downwards. There was no evidence of close-range firing, which suggested to Dr.

Arunkumar that the gun was fired at least two feet or more away from Duffie’s body. The

toxicology reports showed no signs of alcohol, opiates, cocaine, or fentanyl in Duffie’s system.

¶ 16   The police recovered a fired 9mm cartridge from the apartment staircase leading to the

second floor and a semi-automatic 9mm pistol from the closet shelf in Graves’s apartment.

                                                -6-
No. 1-22-0918

Forensic testing results showed that the fired cartridge case recovered from the stairs was fired

from the pistol recovered in Graves’s apartment. The police collected Graves’s shirt containing

suspected blood stains. DNA analysis results determined Duffie was the donor of the female DNA

profile from the blood stains on the shirt. The police recovered a steak knife from a purse found

on Duffie’s body, but no blood was indicated on the knife.

¶ 17   After the parties rested their case, the circuit court instructed the jury, in relevant part, on

self-defense and second-degree murder. The jury found Graves guilty of first-degree murder.

Graves filed a post-trial motion alleging the trial court erred in: (1) excluding the 9-1-1 recording,

(2) excluding Rogers’s testimony regarding Duffie’s battery conviction, and (3) sustaining several

State objections at trial. Graves also argued that the State failed to prove her guilty beyond a

reasonable doubt of first-degree murder, and that the prosecutor made improper remarks in closing

argument. A supplemental post-trial motion was filed after Graves obtained new counsel. The

supplemental motion argued Graves’s murder conviction was inconsistent with the evidence of

Duffie’s aggression. The court denied the motions.

¶ 18   The trial court sentenced Graves to 30 years’ imprisonment. Graves filed a motion to

reconsider sentence, and the court reduced Graves’s sentence to 28 years after reconsideration.

This appeal followed.

¶ 19                                    II. JURISDICTION

¶ 20   The trial court sentenced Graves on May 27, 2022, and she filed a timely motion to

reconsider sentence. The court granted the motion on June 6, 2022, and Graves filed a notice of

appeal on the same day. This court has jurisdiction pursuant to article VI, section 6, of the Illinois

Constitution (Ill. Const. 1970, art VI, § 6), and Illinois Supreme Court Rule 603 (eff. Feb. 6, 2013)

                                                -7-
No. 1-22-0918

and Rule 606 (eff. Mar. 12, 2021), governing appeals from final judgments of conviction in

criminal cases.

¶ 21                                     III. ANALYSIS

¶ 22   On appeal, Graves argues: (1) the State failed to disprove beyond a reasonable doubt that

she acted in self-defense or, alternatively, her conviction should be reduced to second-degree

murder; (2) the court erroneously excluded evidence in violation of her right to present a defense;

(3) the prosecutor made improper remarks during closing arguments; (4) the court failed to ensure

the jurors understood that she was presumed innocent of the charges; and (5) her sentence is

excessive. First, we will review Graves’s self-defense claim.

¶ 23   Graves argues that the State failed to disprove beyond a reasonable doubt that she acted in

self-defense because the State’s evidence was consistent with Graves’s testimony that she was

defending herself when Duffie had destroyed her property, threatened her with a knife, and pulled

her on the staircase. The State claims that the evidence showed Graves was the aggressor and not

in danger of imminent harm when she shot Duffie, and thus, the jury could have found that Graves

did not act in self-defense.

¶ 24   Whether a defendant acted in self-defense is a question for the jury. People v. Hayes, 2011

IL App (1st) 100127, ¶ 31. The standard of review is whether, after considering the evidence in

the light most favorable to the State, any rational trier of fact could have found, beyond a

reasonable doubt, that defendant did not act in self-defense. People v. Lee, 213 Ill. 2d 218, 225

(2004). The trier of fact remains responsible for resolving conflicts in the testimony, weighing the

evidence, and drawing reasonable inferences from the facts. People v. Harris, 2018 IL 121932,

¶ 26. “A reviewing court will not reweigh the evidence or substitute its judgment on these matters

                                               -8-
No. 1-22-0918

for that of the jury.” Id. A conviction will not be reversed on appeal for insufficient evidence unless

the evidence is so improbable or unsatisfactory that a reasonable doubt remains as to the

defendant’s guilt. Id.

¶ 25   First-degree murder occurs when a person kills another individual without lawful

justification. 720 ILCS 5/9-1 (West 2020). One lawful justification that a defendant may raise is

the affirmative defense of self-defense. See 720 ILCS 5/7-1(a) (West 2020). Specifically, a

defendant is “justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily

harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great

bodily harm to himself or another, or the commission of a forcible felony.” Id. Thus, the defendant

must establish some evidence of the following elements: (1) force was threatened against him; (2)

he was not the aggressor; (3) the danger of harm was imminent; (4) the threatened force was

unlawful; (5) he actually and subjectively believed a danger existed which required the use of the

force applied; and (6) his beliefs were objectively reasonable. People v. Jeffries, 164 Ill. 2d 127-

28 (1995). “Once an affirmative defense is raised, the State has the burden of proving the defendant

guilty beyond a reasonable doubt as to that issue together with all the other elements of the

offense.” Id. at 127. If the State negates any one of the self-defense elements, the defendant’s claim

of self-defense must fail. Id. at 128. If the State fails to prove the defendant was not justified in

using force that he used, then the jury must find the defendant not guilty of first-degree murder.

Id.

¶ 26   “The test of self-defense is not what the fact finder thinks a reasonable [person] would

believe but what the defendant as a reasonable [person] believed under the circumstances.” People

v. Lenzi, 41 Ill. App. 3d 825, 835 (1976). The right to self-defense arises before the first blood is

                                                 -9-
No. 1-22-0918

drawn. People v. Speed, 52 Ill. 2d 141, 146 (1972). It is not necessary for the deceased to have

actually possessed or used a deadly weapon to justify self-defense. People v. White, 87 Ill. App.

3d 321, 324 (1980). “If a person is confronted with such means or force as to induce a reasonable

belief that he is in danger of loss of life or of suffering great bodily harm, that is all the law requires

to justify a killing as self-defense.” Id.

¶ 27    In White, this court found that a defendant reasonably believed he was in danger of

imminent harm when the decedent had previously harmed the defendant and was threatening him

at the time of the occurrence. Id. There, the defendant was charged with voluntary manslaughter

after he fatally shot the decedent and raised a self-defense claim. Id. at 322. The trial evidence

revealed the decedent had cut the defendant with a knife some months prior to the shooting. Id.

On the day of the shooting, the decedent was angry with the defendant about a prior incident and

followed the defendant to his apartment where the two began arguing. Id. The defendant and his

wife told the decedent to go home, but the decedent brandished a knife and made threats. Id. The

decedent was told again to go home, and he continued to approach the defendant. Id. The defendant

then fired one shot resulting in the decedent’s death. Id. Given the evidence, including the

decedent’s prior violent behavior against the defendant and his threats prior to the shooting, this

court found the defendant acted in self-defense. Id. at 324.

¶ 28    Similarly, we conclude Graves met the elements of self-defense under the circumstances

of this case. Graves’s largely uncontroverted testimony revealed she and Duffie’s argument began

when Graves texted Duffie about an issue she discovered in the hallway of the apartment. Duffie

called Graves yelling and calling her foul names and locked Graves out of her apartment. Duffie

eventually unlocked the apartment door, and the two continued to argue as Graves walked toward

                                                  - 10 -
No. 1-22-0918

the kitchen. During the argument, Duffie threatened Graves with a knife, punched a hole in the

apartment wall, and punched the fish tank causing debris to spill onto the floor. The police

corroborated the damage to the wall and the fish tank.

¶ 29      Graves continuously told Duffie to calm down, leave the apartment, and the police were

on the way. Duffie eventually left but continued to threaten Graves outside the apartment door. At

first, Graves saw Duffie with a stick in her hand stating she was going to mess up Graves’s car.

Duffie later returned to the door with two men. Duffie eventually went downstairs, and Graves

continued to wait for the police. A few minutes later, Graves decided to go downstairs and talk

with Duffie about damaging her car. Graves stated that she took her gun with her because she was

scared. When Graves found Duffie, they continued the verbal argument. Graves stopped arguing

and walked back to her apartment. Duffie followed and as Graves walked up the staircase, she felt

Duffie “grab me, wrestling me, pulling me towards her.” Graves then grabbed her firearm and

fired one shot at Duffie.

¶ 30      The State argues that Graves was the aggressor because she was not afraid, but angry and

frustrated with Duffie. The State asserts that after the altercation ended, Graves called Rogers and

threatened to shoot Duffie, armed herself with a gun, pursued Duffie, requested that she come out

of McCoy’s apartment, and then continued the altercation. The State further argues that there was

also no evidence of a close-range firing, meaning Graves was at least two feet away when she shot

Duffie.

¶ 31      We find the evidence refutes the State’s argument. First, the State provides an unreasonable

interpretation of Graves’s statement to Rogers. Rogers testified that Graves stated, “she was going

to shoot [Duffie]” if “[Duffie] run up on her” meaning “get in her face.” By its plain meaning, a

                                                 - 11 -
No. 1-22-0918

rational trier of fact could only conclude that the statement meant Graves would defend herself if

Duffie attacked her. Moreover, the State’s theory that Graves was angry and frustrated with Duffie

is negated by the fact that no witnesses saw Graves escalate the verbal argument or expose the gun

during the argument, that she walked away from the argument, and did not shoot until Duffie

pulled her on the staircase, which is corroborated by the evidence showing the fired cartridge was

found on the staircase. Also, the forensic evidence establishing that Graves did not fire the gun at

close range does not disprove her account that Duffie tried to pull her on the staircase. Without

more evidence regarding the precise distance between Graves and Duffie at the time of the

shooting, any inference contrary to Graves’s testimony is dubious and a rational trier of fact could

only conclude Duffie pulled Graves despite no evidence of a close-range firing.

¶ 32   The State also asserts the evidence showed Graves was not in danger of imminent harm

because Duffie was not displaying or threatening Graves with a weapon at the time of the shooting

and a “tug” does not constitute imminent harm. We first note that Graves’s testimony about

Duffie’s behavior on the staircase cannot be diminished to a “tug” absent any evidence to the

contrary. The record shows the only references to a “tug” are from the attorneys’ questioning and

comments. Graves explicitly testified that Duffie grabbed, wrestled, and pulled Graves towards

her while they were on the staircase. Graves stated she became scared that Duffie would stab her

to death and fired one shot to defend herself. This testimony refutes the State’s argument regarding

imminent harm. While there is no evidence Duffie displayed the knife found in her purse at the

time of the shooting, the law does not charge a person in Graves’s situation to use infallible

judgment when she believes she is in danger of losing her life or suffering great bodily harm. See

White, 87 Ill. App. 3d at 323; People v. Lenzi, 41 Ill. App. 3d 825, 835 (1976) (“[t]he test of self-

                                               - 12 -
No. 1-22-0918

defense is not what the fact finder thinks a reasonable [person] would believe but what the

defendant as a reasonable [person] believed under the circumstances”).

¶ 33   Lastly, the State claims Graves’s use of force was not objectively reasonable because there

was no evidence Duffie displayed or threatened to stab Graves with a knife. But the law does not

require the deceased to possess or use a deadly weapon to justify self-defense. See White, 87 Ill.

App. 3d at 324. Here, the evidence showed Graves was confronted with force that induced a

reasonable belief that she was in danger, particularly given her knowledge of Duffie’s violent

behavior. See Id. Graves testified she felt Duffie “grab me, wrestling me, pulling me towards her”

and, after experiencing Duffie’s destructive behavior and threat with a knife earlier that day,

Graves was afraid for her life and fired one shot to defend herself.

¶ 34   Even viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, the evidence shows

Graves reasonably believed she was in danger of losing her life or suffering great bodily harm.

Prior to the shooting, Duffie acted in an aggressive manner toward Graves. Duffie punched a hole

in the apartment wall and the fish tank and threatened Graves with a knife while Graves called the

police and continuously asked Duffie to leave the apartment. Graves was also aware of Duffie’s

violent criminal history. Although the two continued the argument downstairs, Graves realized

that it was going nowhere and walked away. Duffie followed, then grabbed, wrestled, and pulled

Graves on the staircase. Having been subject to Duffie’s threats and violent behavior that day,

Graves became afraid that Duffie would stab her to death and fired one shot to defend herself.

While the State theorizes that Graves’s testimony exhibits her frustration and anger with Duffie,

rather than fear, we find its arguments insufficient to disprove beyond a reasonable doubt that

                                               - 13 -
No. 1-22-0918

Graves acted in self-defense. Because our decision on the issue is dispositive of this appeal, we

need not address the remaining issues.

¶ 35                                     IV. CONCLUSION

¶ 36    We find the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Graves was not acting in

self-defense when she shot Duffie. Accordingly, we reverse Graves’s conviction.

¶ 37   Reversed; conviction vacated.

                                              - 14 -