No. 3--02--0238
IN THE
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS
THIRD DISTRICT
A.D., 2003
| THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE | ) | Appeal from the Circuit Court |
| OF ILLINOIS, | ) | of the 21st Judicial Circuit, |
| ) | Kankakee County, Illinois | |
| Plaintiff-Appellee, | ) | |
| ) | ||
| v. | ) | No. 00--CM--373 |
| ) | ||
| JUDI L. MARCOTTE, | ) | Honorable |
| ) | Susan S. Tungate, | |
| Defendant-Appellant. | ) | Judge, Presiding. |
JUSTICE HOLDRIDGE delivered the Opinion of the court:
Following a bench trial, the defendant, Judi L. Marcotte,was found guilty of disorderly conduct by knowingly transmittinga false report of the sexual abuse of a child to the Departmentof Children and Family Services (DCFS) (720 ILCS 5/26--1(a)(7)(West 1998)). On appeal, the defendant argues that the Statefailed to prove the elements of the crime beyond a reasonabledoubt. We affirm.
I. BACKGROUND
The record of the trial in this case consists of a certifiedbystander's report.
At trial, Detective Gregory Kunce of the Bourbonnais PoliceDepartment testified for the State. He stated that heinvestigated an anonymous telephone call placed to the DCFS"hotline" on September 3, 1999, alleging that a five-year oldchild had been sexually abused at the Fortin Villa Daycare Center(Fortin Villa) in Bourbonnais. Kunce said that he assisted ininterviewing the child and determined that the child had not beenabused.
The officer testified that the child's mother, RachelGagnon, told him about a conversation that Gagnon had with GinaBlanchette in August 1999. In that conversation, Blanchette saidthat the defendant had told her during a phone conversation thatDCFS was investigating Fortin Villa. At trial, the defendantobjected that the officer's testimony was hearsay. The courtoverruled the defendant's objection and admitted the testimonyfor the purpose of establishing Kunce's investigation.
Kunce said that he went to the defendant's home to interviewthe defendant concerning Gagnon's statement. During thisinterview, the defendant denied contacting DCFS. Kunce statedthat during the interview, the defendant's answers were short andvague. While at her home, Kunce noted that the defendantprovided daycare. He observed other parents coming and goingfrom the residence.
Kunce testified that the defendant phoned him at the policestation "a day or so after" he interviewed her at her home. Inresponse to one of Kunce's questions, the defendant said that ifa telephone call was made to DCFS from her home, it was not madeby her. She suggested that such a call may have been made byBlanchette because Blanchette had access to the defendant's homeand telephone. Blanchette testified that at one time thedefendant provided childcare for Blanchette's child.
Kunce initiated a second telephone conversation with thedefendant during her daycare business hours. He told thedefendant that he had a copy of her telephone records whichshowed that the call to DCFS originated from her telephonenumber. On cross-examination, Kunce said that, contrary to whathe told the defendant, her phone records did not show a call fromher home to DCFS. He submitted that "1-800" numbers could not betraced. Kunce stated that he did not obtain a copy of the DCFS"hotline" tape of the phone call, "or any other verbal evidenceor telephone documentation pertaining to the alleged complaint toDCFS."
Kunce submitted that this second phone conversation with thedefendant lasted approximately 45 minutes. He said that inresponse to his last question to her she said, "yes[,] I did it." According to Kunce, he then told the defendant that he was goingto arrest her. On cross-examination, Kunce stated that he didnot remember the exact words that the defendant used in her"claimed 'admission[,]'" but that she used words similar to thosehe used in his previous testimony.
Blanchette testified for the State. She said that during aphone conversation she initiated with the defendant in August1999, the defendant told Blanchette that the defendant heard arumor that DCFS was investigating Fortin Villa. Blanchette saidthat she later called Gagnon and Diana Parker, the director ofFortin Villa, and told them of the rumor. During cross-examination, Blanchette stated that she did not know who calledDCFS. She submitted that she did not call DCFS.
Parker testified that Kunce investigated the child abuseclaim. She, however, did not recall a phone call regarding therumor that DCFS was investigating Fortin Villa.
The defendant took the witness stand in her own defense. She testified that she was a licensed daycare provider since1998. The defendant contended that she never made any contactwith DCFS regarding an alleged sexual abuse incident at FortinVilla. She submitted that she did not admit to Kunce that shemade such a phone call to DCFS.
The defendant stated that the second phone conversation withKunce took place while she was providing childcare, when she wastired, and when a speech therapist was at her home working withher child. When she told Kunce that her phone conversation withhim was going on too long, Kunce told her that it would beagainst the law for her to hang up on him. The defendanttestified that out of her exasperation over the length of thecall and because of Kunce's persistence, she sarcastically toldKunce, "Yes[,] I made a phone call, yeah whatever" in order toend the call. She submitted that the phone conversation withKunce lasted approximately 1