Court Opinion

ID: 9724930
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 11:21:30.415258+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:10:57.659055
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE COUSINS, specially concurring: Because I agree that comments made by the prosecutor during rebuttal argument caused substantial prejudice to the defendants, I concur specially in the decision to reverse and remand for a new trial. However, the opening statement that was made by the defense counsel for Abadía in this case is a “bombshell.” The defense counsel made the following opening statement: “At the very outset I want to tell you that the charge against Roberto Abadía is a false charge, it’s an absolutely false charge. * * * Members of the jury, it’s true that Roberto Abadía has those legal advantages, the burden of proof and the presumption of innocence. But in this case Mr. Abadía doesn’t want it. Mr. Abadía is going to prove to you, we will competently prove to you, that he did not commit any murder. Members of the jury, I’m going to bring into this courtroom — Let me back up. Let me tell you this: I’m going to make full disclosure to you about Roberto Abadía and I’m going to tell you at the very outset, at the veiy beginning of this trial that Mr. Abadía is not an angel and that he’s not a choir boy. I want to tell you that from the beginning. Mr. a Babb [sic] I can’t was, in fact, involved with illegal substances, with controlled substances. Yes, he was a drug dealer and yes, members of the jury, I’m going to prove to you that he owed people money and so did the dead person in this case, the decedent, Mr. Arce. And but for the grace of God Roberto Abadía was almost a victim himself. And there is another eyewitness to this case, members of the jury, besides the engineer of that Norfolk and Western locomotive facing south down those tracks, and there is another eyewitness in this case, and you are going to hear from that eyewitness as to what really happened down that embankment that ran parallel down to those railroad tracks. And you’re going to hear that Mr. Abadía himself was going to be a victim of an execution. And you’re going to hear what actually occurred that night and what happened to him. You’re going to hear things in this case that the prosecution has in their file and won’t disclose, but we will disclose those to you and we’ll bring the light of day into this courtroom and not hide anything from you. You are going to hear evidence, and when you — evidence that will exonerate, if you will, that at the end you will come to the conclusion that Roberto Abadía is not a murderer. * H< * Counsel mentioned to you the gunshot residue. Yes, and he also mentioned to you blood on Mr. Abadía. I can tell you that there was indeed blood on Mr. Abadía. And you’ll find out the reason soon enough why there was blood on Mr. Abadía. * Hi * Members of the jury, when this case is over you will come to the conclusion that Mr. Abadía is not a murderer and this is a false charge. And our evidence, that is Mr. Abadia’s evidence, will come in.” During the closing argument, counsel for defendant Abadía argued: “There is an instruction that the Judge is going to give to you this morning. * Ht H< I suppose that saves me because two days ago I came to this courtroom and I promised every one of you folks sincerely that I was going to present the case. I’m not asking his Honor, Judge Moran to exonerate me or save me or what this instruction the law, the law of the State of Illinois to save me. If you’re mad at me, please don’t take it out on Roberto Abadía, tell me afterwards, ‘you lied to me.’ I didn’t lie to you. I sincerely thought I had to present a case.” In my view, this is a case where the arguments by both the State and defense are improper. Unfortunately, when such occurs, justice is thwarted.