Will County changes COVID-19 court rules

Jury trials allowed after defense attorney seeks to have murder charges dismissed due to delays

Will County is altering COVID-19 court rules to allow jury trials in some cases as a defense attorney Friday sought, unsuccessfully, to have a murder case dismissed because of delays.

Defense attorney Jeff Tomczak argued his client, Rasean Stokes, was being denied due process rights based on an Aug. 25 administrative order from the court staying jury trials. However, on Thursday the presiding judges of the felony and misdemeanor courts signed orders stating “that all jury trials shall be heard at the discretion of the assigned trial judge” and urged that safety guidelines be followed in light of the pandemic.

Will County Judge Vincent Cornelius set Stokes’ case for a jury trial on Nov. 13, after the county opens a new courthouse. Stokes, 19, is charged with two counts of first-degree murder and one count each of aggravated discharge of a firearm and aiding a fugitive for a Feb. 7 shooting that killed a Joliet teen.

In his ruling, Cornelius took note of the COVID-19 deaths in the United States, the virus infection rates, concerns for the health and safety of those in the court and the court’s obligation to uphold defendant’s rights to a speedy trial. He noted various iterations of the local administrative orders related to court cases with only “essential” cases being heard at first and the Aug. 25 court order putting trials on hold as the region’s test positivity rates increased.

Cornelius also noted that, until recently, Tomczak had not requested a jury trial or asserted his client’s demand for a speedy trial. Tomczak, however, said he only recently received all the discovery materials related to the

trial.

While Cornelius agreed with Tomczak’s argument that a defendant’s right to a jury trial could not be violated, he denied Tomczak’s argument that the case should be dismissed based on the Aug. 25 administrative order, saying doing so could result in a “wholesale dismissal” of other pending criminal cases.

Tomczak argued that the most recent order, leaving it to the discretion of the trial judge to decide when jury trials can be held, is a step in the right direction, but still falls short.

“It’s a Band-Aid,” Tomczak said, arguing leaving it up the trial judge puts a defendant in the position of having to ask permission to go to jury trial.

He argued that the decision to have a jury trial, instead of a bench trial before a judge, rests solely with the defendant. He also said that when defendants opt for a bench trial they are admonished and questioned if they are certain they wish to waive their right to a jury trial.

“It is not in your discretion,” Tomczak argued. “It’s solely, completely and entirely for the defendant to decide whether hegets a jury or not.”

Tomczak said he may appeal the ruling on his motion.