Raymond Wigell and Huma Rashid were scheduled to be at the Cook County Courthouse in Markham, Illinois, this morning. We were appearing on two different felony cases, so it was a light morning. Both of the court appointments were status hearings for discovery. The discovery process is a detailed exercise and often frustrating, but is necessary for a proper evaluation of the case.
In the first status hearing, our client stood accused in a three (3) count indictment with the charges listed below:
- Aggravated Unlawful Use of a Weapon – No Valid FOID Card: 720 ILCS 5/24-1.6(a)(1)(3)(C)· ·
- Aggravated Unlawful Use of a Weapon – Person Under 21: 720 ILCS 5/24-1.6(a)(1)(3)(I))We appeared for the purpose of obtaining a status update on the digital recording of a 9-1-1 call made in the matter, for which the State had previously issued a subpoena.The State appeared and stated that a subpoena was not returned as of today. We are hopeful the State continues to work diligently to obtain a copy of the 9-1-1 call that was placed. Afterward, we met with the client and his family to relate what had happened and when the next court date was.In the second hearing, our client stood accused in a thirty-one (31) count indictment with the charges listed below:· Four (4) counts Attempted Murder in the First Degree: 720 ILCS 5/8-4(a), 720 ILCS 5/9-1(a)(1)· Five (5) counts Home Invasion: 720 ILCS 5/12-11(a)(3)· Four (4) counts Armed Robbery: 720 ILCS 5/18-2(a)(2)· Seven (7) counts Aggravated Kidnapping: 720 ILCS 5/10-2(a)(6)· Two (2) counts Aggravated Battery with a Firearm: 720 ILCS 5/12-4.2(a)(1)· Two (2) counts Aggravated Discharge of a Firearm: 720 ILCS 5/24-1.2(a)(2)· Five (5) counts of Aggravated Unlawful Restraint: 720 ILCS 5/10-3.1· One (1) count of Aggravated Unlawful Use of a Weapon – Firearm Uncased, Loaded and Immediately Accessible: 720 ILCS 5/24-1.6(a)(1)(3)(A)· One (1) count of Aggravated Unlawful Use of a Weapon – No Valid FOID Card: 720 ILCS 5/24-1.6(a)(1)(3)(C)In this case, we as Defense counsel have been going back and forth with the State about whether or not the medical records on file for the victims are complete or not. The State contended that the Defense had requested specific records, and we offered the correction that it was the State that previously said that the records weren’t complete, and the Defense was merely waiting on the additional files if the records were not all there. We offered to schedule an in-person meeting with the State in order to go through the case file. The Court set a final status update for mid-January in 2013.We met with the State for a file review immediately afterward. Together, the Assistant State’s Attorney and Raymond Wigell went through the medical records already on file to determine whether or not they were complete. It was ultimately determined that they were not, and the State needed to re-subpoena the hospital l for one set of records, and subpoena another hospital for an additional set of medical records.Having agreed on the course of action the State would take, we met with our client and explained what had happened. We told the client what this meant for his case and answered his questions, and then made sure he knew when to appear for the next court date.And we’ll come back swinging in the New Year.
For more information on the Law Offices of Raymond G. Wigell, Ltd., Raymond G. Wigell or Huma Rashid please visit our our criminal defense law firm's website or call (708) 481-4800.