Find Legal Information

Docket No. 89649-Agenda 11-March 2001.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Appellant, v. 
HARRY W. ELLIS, Appellee.

Opinion filed February 22, 2002.

JUSTICE KILBRIDE delivered the opinion of the court:

In this case we are asked to decide whether Illinois willrecognize the "exculpatory no" doctrine as an exception tocriminal liability for obstruction of justice pursuant to section31-4(a) of the Criminal Code of 1961 (Code) (720 ILCS 5/31-4(West 1996)). We answer that question in the negative.

On October 25, 1996, the Lake County State's Attorney filedan information against defendant, Harry W. Ellis, allegingattempted obstruction of justice pursuant to section 31-4(a) of theCode and unlawful display of vehicular registration pursuant tosection 4-104(a) of the Illinois Vehicle Code (625 ILCS5/4-104(a) (West 1996)). Specifically, the State alleged thatdefendant was operating a motor vehicle without properregistration and, when detained by a police officer, provided falseinformation regarding his identity. The State also chargeddefendant with driving on a revoked license.

A jury convicted defendant of one count of attemptedobstruction of justice but acquitted him of unlawful display ofregistration. Defendant was also convicted of driving on arevoked license. Defendant appealed, arguing that he was deniedeffective assistance of counsel and that the State improperlybolstered the credibility of police witnesses at trial. The appellatecourt did not reach the issues defendant raised and instead ruledsua sponte that defendant's conviction must be overturned underthe "exculpatory no doctrine." No. 2-98-0832 (unpublished orderunder Supreme Court Rule 23).

We allowed the State's petition for leave to appeal. 166 Ill.2d R. 315(a). We reverse and remand.

I. BACKGROUND

Officer Tony Moran testified that he worked as a policeofficer in Grayslake. He testified that, on October 4, 1996, he wason patrol and noticed a car being driven with no rear registrationsticker. Moran stopped the car and asked the driver foridentification and proof of insurance. According to Moran, thedriver claimed that he did not have his license with him, that hisname was Gary Harris, and that his date of birth was September14, 1954.

Moran returned to his car and ran a computerized backgroundcheck. The background check revealed that Illinois databasescontained no record of a licensed driver with that name and dateof birth. When Moran returned and confronted the driver with thisinformation, the driver suggested that Moran try checkingColorado. Similarly, a background check revealed that Coloradodatabases contained no record of a licensed driver with that nameand date of birth. Moran again confronted the driver. The drivermaintained that his name was Gary Harris, but that his date ofbirth was October 14, 1954. Moran still found no information ineither Illinois or Colorado databases. Moran wrote on his notepadthe name Gary Harris and both dates of birth that the driver hadgiven him. Moran showed the notepad to the driver and was toldthat it was correct. Moran "knew [the driver] was lying *** orobstructing a peace officer" and placed him under arrest.

Moran subsequently searched the car's glove compartmentand found a driver's abstract containing the name Harry Ellis, bornOctober 14, 1956. The abstract contained a physical descriptionthat matched that of the driver. Another background checkrevealed that the Illinois Secretary of State had revoked HarryEllis' driver's license. Under Moran's questioning, the driveradmitted that his name was Harry Ellis and that his date of birthwas October 14, 1956.

The State also called Officer Randolph Heglund, who hadarrived on the scene as backup during the second backgroundcheck. His testimony corroborated Moran's.

Defendant testified on his own behalf. Defendant testified thathe was stopped by Moran while driving a car belonging to agentleman named Gary Beckman. He claimed that, when Moranasked his name, he replied "Harry Ellis." Defendant also testifiedto a continuing error on his Illinois driver's license abstract,misstating his birth date as October 4, 1956. He added that henever had an opportunity to explain this problem to Moran.

The defense also presented the testimony of Ricardo Javierand Lucy Ora. Javier and Ora were passengers in the car at thetime of the stop. They both testified that defendant gave his correctname and date of birth to Moran.

Defendant was convicted of driving on a revoked license andattempted obstruction of justice but acquitted of unlawful displayof registration. The trial court sentenced defendant to a six-monthjail term. The court stayed defendant's sentence pending thesuccessful completion of a one-year term of probation.

Defendant appealed, arguing that he was denied effectiveassistance of counsel and that the State improperly bolstered thecredibility of police witnesses at trial. The appellate court did notreach these issues and instead ruled sua sponte that defendant'sconviction must be overturned under the "exculpatory nodoctrine." The appellate court found that defendant should nothave been prosecuted for attempted obstruction of justice when hewas the target of an officer's investigation and a truthful revelationof his name would have been tantamount to an admission ofdriving with a revoked license. 625 ILCS 5/6-303 (West 1996).The appellate court reasoned that, despite the absence of briefingor argument on the issue, justice required application of thedoctrine to avoid a grave error of law.

We granted the State's petition for leave to appeal. 177 Ill. 2dR. 315.

II. ANALYSIS

The issue of whether a defendant can rely upon theexculpatory no doctrine to escape criminal liability pursuant tosection 31-4(a) of the Code is a question of law and therefore ourreview is de novo. Department of Public Aid ex rel. Davis v.Brewer, 183 Ill. 2d 540, 554 (1998).

Section 31-4(a) states in pertinent part as follows:

"A person obstructs justice when, with intent to preventthe apprehension or obstruct the prosecution or defense ofany person, he knowingly commits any of the followingacts:

(a) *** furnishes false information." 720 ILCS 5/31-4(West 1996).

The exculpatory no doctrine originated in the federal courts asan exception to section 1001 of title 18 United States Code (18U.S.C.