Defendant Charged with Aggravated Sexual Abuse of a Minor
The Fifth District upheld one of two aggravated criminal sexual abuse convictions after finding that the State presented sufficient evidence to prove the charged conduct beyond a reasonable doubt.
In People v. Fenton, 2024 IL App (5th) 220724-U, the Illinois Fifth District Appellate Court considered whether the State presented sufficient evidence to support William Fenton’s conviction for aggravated criminal sexual abuse.
The State originally charged Fenton with one count of criminal sexual assault and two counts of aggravated criminal sexual abuse involving his stepdaughter, J.S. Fenton waived his right to a jury trial and elected to have the case decided by a judge.
After the bench trial, the circuit court acquitted Fenton of the criminal sexual assault count but found him guilty of both aggravated criminal sexual abuse counts. He was sentenced to 30 months of probation and 30 days in the county jail.
On appeal, Fenton challenged only one of the two aggravated criminal sexual abuse convictions. He argued that the State failed to prove that the touching described by J.S. involved her “sex organ,” an element of the offense charged under Illinois law.
Quick Answer
The Fifth District affirmed the conviction. The court held that the victim’s testimony, viewed in the light most favorable to the State, gave the trial judge a sufficient basis to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that Fenton knowingly touched her sex organ. The appellate court also emphasized that it does not retry criminal cases or substitute its credibility determinations for those of the trial judge.
The decision was filed on January 31, 2024, as a Supreme Court Rule 23 order. It is therefore generally not precedential except in the limited circumstances permitted by Rule 23.
Importantly, the original article’s statement that Fenton was sentenced to 3 to 7 years is not what happened in this case. The circuit court imposed 30 months of probation and 30 days in county jail. The statutory classification of the offense and the actual sentence imposed are separate issues.
Background of the Case
The State initially charged Fenton in December 2017. A superseding indictment filed in August 2021 contained one count of criminal sexual assault under 720 ILCS 5/11-1.20(a)(3) and two counts of aggravated criminal sexual abuse under 720 ILCS 5/11-1.60(b).
The charges involved Fenton’s stepdaughter, J.S. According to the appellate opinion, J.S.’s parents had divorced when she was two years old, and she spent roughly half of her time living with each parent.
When J.S. was seven, her mother married Fenton, whom J.S. referred to as her stepfather.
In July 2017, J.S. told her father that she did not want to return to her mother’s home because Fenton had been touching her. She also called her mother and made the same allegation. Both parents then went to the police station with J.S.
Charges in the Superseding Indictment
Count I
Criminal sexual assault alleging that Fenton placed a finger in J.S.’s sex organ.
Count II
Aggravated criminal sexual abuse alleging that Fenton touched J.S.’s sex organ under her clothing.
Count III
Aggravated criminal sexual abuse alleging that Fenton touched J.S.’s breast under her clothing.
J.S. Testified About the Alleged Conduct
J.S. testified that on July 28, 2017, she was at her mother’s house while her mother was asleep upstairs. Fenton, J.S., and Fenton’s two-year-old twin grandchildren were in the living room.
J.S. testified that she told Fenton that her calves hurt and that he began rubbing them. According to her testimony, he then rubbed her thighs and buttocks before touching her genital area under her clothing.
J.S. also described another incident in which Fenton rubbed her stomach under her shirt and moved his hand downward toward her pubic area. She testified that this occurred underneath her shorts and underwear.
J.S. further testified about an incident in which Fenton was rubbing her shoulders and back and then touched her breast under her shirt.
Reporting the Allegations
J.S. disclosed the allegations to both of her parents on July 30, 2017. Her parents then took her to the Illinois State Police. An investigator interviewed Fenton, and the interview was audio and video recorded.
Fenton Admitted Giving J.S. Massages but Denied Sexual Contact
During his police interview, Fenton acknowledged that he massaged J.S.’s legs, stomach, and back. He said that she never indicated she was uncomfortable and maintained that he had never intentionally touched her breast or vagina.
Fenton told police that he had “never crossed the line” and stated that he would have stopped if J.S. had told him she was uncomfortable.
At trial, Fenton testified that he had taken some steps toward becoming a massage therapist when he was younger. He maintained that he had massaged J.S. in response to complaints of physical discomfort and argued that she had lied about the alleged inappropriate touching.
The defense also presented character witnesses on Fenton’s behalf.
The Trial Court Found J.S. Credible
Because Fenton chose a bench trial, the circuit court served as the trier of fact rather than a jury. The judge evaluated the testimony and other evidence and made credibility determinations.
The circuit court found J.S. to be a credible witness. In contrast, the judge found Fenton’s testimony less credible because of inconsistencies between his statements to police and his testimony in court.
The circuit court ultimately found Fenton guilty on the two aggravated criminal sexual abuse counts but acquitted him of the more serious criminal sexual assault charge.
Trial Result
Count Acquitted
The circuit court acquitted Fenton of criminal sexual assault.
Convictions
Fenton was convicted on both aggravated criminal sexual abuse counts.
Probation
The sentence included 30 months of probation and 30 days in county jail.
The Appeal Focused on One Conviction
On appeal, Fenton did not challenge both aggravated criminal sexual abuse convictions. His sole appellate argument concerned count II.
Fenton argued that the State failed to prove that he touched J.S.’s “sex organ,” an essential element of aggravated criminal sexual abuse under 720 ILCS 5/11-1.60(b).
His argument focused on J.S.’s testimony describing where his hand touched her. He contended that her description of touching the upper pubic area, without touching the folds of the genital area, was not enough to establish contact with a “sex organ.”
The appellate court rejected that argument.
The Appellate Standard
When a defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, an appellate court considers the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution and asks whether any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. The appellate court does not retry the defendant or independently reweigh witness credibility.
Illinois Law Defines “Sexual Conduct”
Under 720 ILCS 5/11-0.1, “sexual conduct” includes knowingly touching or fondling, either directly or through clothing, the sex organs, anus, or breast of the victim or accused.
Under 720 ILCS 5/11-1.60(b), aggravated criminal sexual abuse occurs when a person engages in an act of sexual conduct with a victim under 18 years of age and the person is a family member.
The statute does not require the State to prove a particular anatomical measurement or to establish that every portion of a particular anatomical area was touched. The question for the trier of fact was whether the evidence established the required contact beyond a reasonable doubt.
The Fifth District concluded that J.S.’s testimony, together with the rest of the evidence, allowed the trial court to find the necessary element beyond a reasonable doubt.
Why the Conviction Was Affirmed
The appellate court relied on J.S.’s testimony describing the touching, the timing and circumstances of the incident, and the trial court’s finding that J.S. was credible. Because the evidence was sufficient when viewed in the light most favorable to the State, the appellate court affirmed the conviction.
Similar Illinois Cases Supported the Court’s Analysis
The Fifth District relied in part on earlier decisions addressing whether a child’s description of the location of sexual touching was sufficient to support an aggravated criminal sexual abuse conviction.
In People v. C.H., a child described the defendant touching her “bottom” underneath her clothes, and the Second District concluded that the testimony was sufficient to support the conviction.
The Fifth District also relied on its prior decision in People v. Rowlands, 2022 IL App (5th) 200221, where the court found sufficient evidence based on a child’s testimony describing touching of her private area.
The court used those cases to explain that a trier of fact may draw reasonable conclusions from a child’s testimony about the location and nature of the touching rather than requiring the State to prove the allegation through a particular anatomical description.
Aggravated Criminal Sexual Abuse in Illinois
Under 720 ILCS 5/11-1.60(b), aggravated criminal sexual abuse can be charged when a person commits an act of sexual conduct with a victim under 18 and the person is a family member.
The Illinois Criminal Code’s definition of “family member” includes relationships such as parents, stepparents, siblings, and other specified family or household relationships. Because Fenton was the victim’s stepfather, the family-member provision was relevant to the charges in this case.
Under the current statute, a violation of subsection (b) is a Class 2 felony. Illinois generally provides a sentencing range of 3 to 7 years of imprisonment for a Class 2 felony, although the applicable sentence in an individual case depends on the statute, the circumstances of the offense, and the defendant’s eligibility for probation or other sentencing options.
Fenton’s actual sentence in this case was 30 months of probation and 30 days in county jail, as reflected in the appellate decision. The circuit court’s sentence is therefore an example of a sentence imposed in a specific case and should not be treated as the statutory sentencing range for every aggravated criminal sexual abuse conviction.
Sex Offender Registration Can Also Apply
A conviction for aggravated criminal sexual abuse is among the offenses that can trigger registration requirements under Illinois’ Sex Offender Registration Act, 730 ILCS 150/2.
The duration of registration is governed by the Sex Offender Registration Act and can depend on the offense, the defendant’s history, and other statutory circumstances. It is therefore not accurate to state categorically that every conviction under section 11-1.60 results in lifetime registration. The registration requirements should be evaluated based on the specific conviction and applicable version of the law.
Illinois’ registration statutes have also been amended over time, making it especially important to determine which statutory provisions apply to the conviction at issue rather than assuming that every sex offense carries the same registration period.
Important Legal Distinction
Criminal charges involving sexual conduct can carry consequences extending beyond the sentence itself. Registration requirements, restrictions on where a person may live or work, and other collateral consequences can depend on the specific offense and applicable law.
What People v. Fenton Means for Illinois Criminal Cases
People v. Fenton, 2024 IL App (5th) 220724-U illustrates how Illinois appellate courts review challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence in criminal cases. The appellate court does not retry the defendant, resolve witness conflicts anew, or search for every possible explanation consistent with innocence.
Instead, the court considers whether a rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt when the evidence is viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution.
The case also demonstrates the significance of credibility determinations in a bench trial. Here, the circuit court found J.S. credible and identified inconsistencies in Fenton’s statements and testimony. The appellate court deferred to those factual determinations when reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence.
Because the appellate court concluded that the evidence was sufficient to support the challenged aggravated criminal sexual abuse conviction, it affirmed the judgment.
Talk to a Champaign, IL Sex Crimes Attorney Today
Patel Law, PC represents people charged with sex crimes and other serious criminal offenses in Illinois. If you are facing a criminal sexual abuse or sexual assault charge, call our Champaign criminal defense lawyers at 217-384-1111 to schedule a consultation and discuss your legal options.
Call Patel Law, PC
Learn More About Patel Law, PC
Sources
People v. Fenton, 2024 IL App (5th) 220724-U
Illinois General Assembly: 720 ILCS 5/11-1.60 — Aggravated Criminal Sexual Abuse
Illinois General Assembly: 720 ILCS 5/11-0.1 — Definitions for Sex Offenses
Illinois General Assembly: 730 ILCS 5/5-4.5-35 — Class 2 Felony Sentencing
Illinois General Assembly: 730 ILCS 150/2 — Sex Offender Registration Act
