People v. Pomykala

Summary

The Illinois Supreme Court held that section 9-3(b) of the Illinois reckless homicide statute created an unconstitutional mandatory presumption that intoxication constituted evidence of recklessness. The court also held that the corresponding jury instruction violated due process, severed the unconstitutional provision from the remainder of the statute, and affirmed the appellate court’s reversal and remand for a new trial.

Holdings

1. Section 9-3(b) created an unconstitutional mandatory presumption of recklessness because its language required the fact finder to presume recklessness from intoxication unless the presumption was rebutted.
2. The jury instruction stating that intoxication "shall be presumed to be evidence of a reckless act unless disproved by evidence to the contrary" violated defendant's due process rights.
3. Section 9-3(b) could be severed from the remainder of the reckless-homicide statute.
4. The instructional error was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.

Questions Presented

1. Whether section 9-3(b) of the Illinois reckless-homicide statute created an unconstitutional mandatory presumption of recklessness.
2. Whether the jury instruction tracking section 9-3(b) violated defendant's due process rights.
3. Whether the unconstitutional statutory presumption could be severed from the remainder of the reckless-homicide statute.
4. Whether the erroneous jury instruction was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.

Disposition

affirmed