STATE OF ILLINOIS

OLOODNCDCn-waA
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 17TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
COUNTY OF WINNEBAGO

THE PEOPLE OF THE

STATE OF ILLINOIS,
PTaintiff,

vs 2014-CF—922

RICHARD WANKE, ,__ Ewan ,W

I 'T‘V" O D \ V :-

Defendant. U:9(\/) \U/

NMNNN—t—LA—L—L—LAA—L.‘

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS at the hearing of the

#WN—‘OCOCD‘JO'DU‘I-bOONA

above-entitTed cause before the HonorabTe ROSEMARY

COLLINS, Judge of said Court, heard on the 18th
day of December, A.D., 2015.

PRESENT:
MR. F. JAMES BRUN and MS. PAMELA WELLS,
Assistant State's Attorneys,
Appeared on behan of the PeopTe;
MR. NICK ZIMMERMAN and MR. ROBERT SIMMONS,
Assistant Public Defenders,
Appeared on behan of the Defendant,

Joyce M. Oison
OfficiaT Court Reporter
A.
P R O C E E D I N G S
OLOOO‘JCDU‘l-b-OJN

(Whereupon the defendant was wearing an

assisted hearing device.)
THE CLERK: PeopTe versus Richard Nanke,

14-CF—922.
MR. ZIMMERMAN: Good afternoon, Judge.
Nick Zimmerman and Rob Simmons on behan
of Mr. Wanke who's present in custody.
MR. BRUN: Your Honor, James Brun on

11 behan of the peopTe.

12 MS. WELLS: Pam WeTTs for the peopTe,

13 your Honor.

14 THE COURT: Good afternoon.

15 Can you hear me?

16 MR. WANKE: (Indicated affirmativeTy with

17 nod of head.)

18 THE COURT: What's the status today?

19 MR. ZIMMERMAN: Judge, the status is I'm

20 asking to continue the case so that I can

21 interview approximateTy four to six witnesses.

22 And aTso prior to my being on the case,

23 it's my understanding that there were discussions

24 about how the funding of expert witnesses woqu be

 handTed and that that woqu be through the court.
_k
And I guess my -- my question is with
OLOCD'flmm-th

respect to that procedure how the court is

suggesting that we handTe that?
THE COURT: NeTT, the concern that was

raised before was that the pubTic defender herseTf

has indicated she feeTs there's a confTict in her

handTing this case and being invoTved with the
case, but she's aTso expressed the View that 311

expenditures for experts have to go through her to

be approved.

So since she feeTS that this is a

confTict on that case, then, obviousTy, the

expenditures for the experts cannot go through

her.
They wiTT stiTT be going through the

budget of the pubTic defender's office. It's not

that the court is taking over the expenses of
experts. They wiTT stiTT be budgeted through the
pubTic defender‘s office, but because she has set
up no process by which someone from the pubTic
defender's office wiTT deaT with it that doesn't
have a confTict, then -— then we wiTT —- we wiTT
do it that way.
 So if you want -- if you want an expert,
OCQCID\I<3)O'I-[>-(I»Jl'\.')-L
then you'TT have to come to the court and ask for
the expert and Tet me know the expenses, and then
I wiTT approve it or not unTess your office is
wiTTing to say you can hire whatever experts you

need without having approvaT, but if they're

saying you can't hire any experts, then -- then

I'm going to say yes, go ahead, and it wiTT run

through your office, the expenses.
MR. ZIMMERMAN: Okay.
NNNNNAAAAAAAAAA

THE COURT: And if she has compTaints

#WN—‘OQOCDNCDm-thA

about that, she's weicome to go taTk to our chief

judge, Judge McGraw.
MR. ZIMMERMAN: Okay. I just wasn't sure

how the —— how the --

THE COURT: Uh-huh.
MR. ZIMMERMAN: -- how that was gonna be
handied.

I know that Attorney D011 is not

confiicted with respect to the case, so I've

taiked to him.
THE COURT: I'm not sure that he
indicated that that was true, but if he -- but if
he's not, that's fine, but —~
 5

MR. ZIMMERMAN: I mean putting aside that

_L
I think our office's position is that the entire
OCCCD‘IGU‘l-D-OJM

office is conf1icted, certain1y he wou1d be

invo1ved in those discussions.

THE COURT: And that's fine with the
court. I just don't -- the door wi11 not be
c1osed to you for experts just because you can't
access your -- the pub1ic defender.
MR. ZIMMERMAN: Okay.
THE COURT: But that doesn't mean

somebody e1se is picking up the tab for it. It

wiT1 come out of the pub1ic defender's budget.

A11 right. Did you have a -- were you

ab1e to meet with Mr. Wanke prior to today's date?

MR. ZIMMERMAN: Yes, Judge.
THE COURT: Okay.
MR. ZIMMERMAN: And I guess going back to
the issue of experts, what wou1d be the procedure
for going to the court? I assume that wou1d be --
THE COURT: We11, do you have an expert?
MR. ZIMMERMAN: Not -- not at this time.
THE COURT: Then I don't think we need to
spend a who1e 1ot of time on that right now then.
MR. ZIMMERMAN: Okay. But I guess I'm
 6

just curious whether or not that wou1d be in an ex

O‘.OCD\ICZD(.71-l>(.n.)l\')—L
parte fashion.

THE COURT: We11, I had envisioned we

probab1y wou1d do something simi1ar to what the
process was in death pena1ty cases.

MR. ZIMMERMAN: Okay. We11, I wi11 ta1k

with my office with respect to that, obvious1y,
not with Ms. Sorensen.
And I wou1d again ask the court to

continue the matter for approximate1y a month so

NMNNN—K-X‘A-x—L—XA—X‘

that I can interview those witnesses that I

#mN—‘OCOCONQU‘ILOJN—‘A

mentioned as we11 as exp1ore where we are with

respect to experts.

THE COURT: And did you say you have to

interview 46 witnesses?
MR. ZIMMERMAN: No, four to six.
THE COURT: Four to six. Okay.

MR. ZIMMERMAN: Correct.

THE COURT: I rea11y wou1d 1ike us to
move c1oser to a tria1 date, and so I'm concerned
about continuing it for a who1e month.
This is from February of 2008, a1though
we a11 know it wasn't actua11y charged at that
time, but it was charged, you know, in 2014, and
 we a11 know it's gonna be 2016.
OCOODNODU‘l-D-OJM—l
So -— so we're gonna have to acce1erate

the amount of time that a11 the attorneys are

spending on this case, as a11 cases do as they get

c1oser to tria1, because -- because I'm

anticipating setting a tria1 date fair1y soon.
Now, I want to give you time to do what

you need to do, but we a11 know how cases are as

they bubb1e up towards the tria1 date and that has

to have more time, and that's the way this case is

NMNMN—L-l—LA—AA-LAAA

now.
th—AOVDCDNCDO‘I-thA

And I know you haven't been on it as 1ong

as other peop1e have, so I'm wi11ing to work with

you on that, but —— but we've got to move forward

on it, so -- so I wi11 give you the time to do
that, but then I'm hoping to set a tria1 date.
So how about January 28 or 27th or any
time that week?
MR. ZIMMERMAN: Your Honor, I'm avai1ab1e

the 27th in the morning.

THE COURT: I can do it in the morning.
MR. BRUN: The state's avai1ab1e, your

Honor.
THE COURT: A11 right. Mr. Simmons, are
 you avai1ab1e?
.—\
wNAOLOCDNODm-PWNAOCOODNODUT-bwlfi) MR. SIMMONS: Yes, Judge, that wi11 work.

THE COURT: A11 right. January 27 then.

That'11 be at 9:00 o'c1ock in this courtroom for

status on that and then setting a tria1 date.

If there are gonna be pretria1 motions on

this, then I want them fi1ed because I'm

anticipating setting a tria1 date in Apri1.

MR. ZIMMERMAN: Thank you, Judge.
THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.
NNNNAAAAAAAAAA

MR. WANKE: Excuse me, your Honor.

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. NANKE: Did the court get my amended

request, was that docketed?

THE COURT: There's a document 1aying in

the fi1e that's ca11ed amended defendant's request

for c1arification and reconsideration.
MR. WANKE: Yes.
THE COURT: That's in the fi1e.

As I to1d you before, I won't be hearing

your motions.
MR. WANKE: Right. We11, I just want to

c1arify something, if that's a11 right.

As Mr. Zimmerman said, we met on
M
4:.
 Wednesday to go over things, but the questions I
OCOCDNOUCfi-D-OON
had that are out1ined in this document and that

you gave us a continuance for, they wou1d not

answer those questions.

And it's a matter of 1aw that I'm -- you

know, it's a matter of 1aw that I'm trying to get

focussed on, on whether putting forth this motion

for return of privi1eged property and then

withdrawing it, whether that waives my privi1ege

and waives reviewabi1ity.

11 You gave us time to discuss that because

12 that's what's in my request for c1arification and

13 my amended request, but they wou1d not answer that
14 question specifica11y.

15 They just came to ta1k to me a moment ago

16 before we came in here, and I don't want to go

17 into it un1ess my attorney wants to ta1k about

18 what we discussed, but they're unwi11ing to

19 discuss those fine points of is —- is the
20 procedure that we just went through in requesting
21 the documents and then having a third party make
22 copies of those documents and hand it through us,

23 does that now waive my privi1ege?

24 And, obvious1y, at 1east in the 1aw that

 10

I'm putting forth here and I understand is I have

.—'L
to knowing1y waive that privi1ege, and I've been
OCOODNOUCfi-h-CDM

seeking those documents and actua11y the

whereabouts of those documents and who has them

since my arrest February 6, 2008.
Documents were seized from me upon my

arrest, documents were seized from my attorney's

office, documents were seized from my apartment,
and documents continue to be seized during my
incarceration whi1e I was awaiting sentencing in
the Winnebago County jai1.
And throughout that who1e procedure I
continued to point out to a11 those authorities,
when I was arrested I pointed out, hey, wait a
minute, those are privi1eged documents, I'm not

waiving privi1ege, I want an attorney.

When I was booked into Winnebago County

jai1, Mr. C1uce (Sic. phonetic) here, who's

sitting next to us, did the intake, said I was
being arrested for the murder of my attorney back
in 2008, February 7, and documents were shown to
me, and I was questioned repeated1y by the po1ice.
THE COURT: I'm gonna have you wrap this

up because I don't have un1imited time.

 11

MR. WANKE: Okay. And I understand that.

_\
Thank you for the time you've given me.
OCDODNCDU‘I-bwm

I'm just trying to wrap my head around

it. If you read my amended request, the jai1 is

going through a period where they're redoing their

1aw 1ibrary, so I can‘t 1ook this up. If I had
the means in which to 100k it up myse1f, I'd 1ook
it up and point it out in a fi1ing.
So I'm comp1ete1y re1iant on my

attorney's opinions and what education and to

answer my questions, and he refuses to discuss
this matter, whether -- whether now privi1ege has

been waived in some 1ega1 maneuver or whether --

and whether it's reviewab1e in the appe11ate court
if it crops up 1ater on and does it spi11 over.
THE COURT: You are actua11y repeating

yourse1f over and over.

MR. WANKE: I'm sorry.

THE COURT: So I understand what you're

saying. So what's your point?
MR. WANKE: My point is that I need -- as

a matter of 1aw, I need c1arification so that _,

whether I want to continue to object to this and
fi1e something in the future or because I know
 12
that if I just 1et this go, it then is waived, the
OCQODNOUO‘l-waA argument or the objection is waived.
I need answers to those 1ega1 questions,

which I'm not getting.

THE COURT: We11, what I wou1d suspect
that your counse1 wi11 do is he wi11 get to it
when he gets to it, but, you know, there's a 1ot
of things that he has to do, and -- and so, you
know, I'm not gonna te11 him, I'm not gonna give
him a 1ist of priorities. I'm not gonna say you
NMNNNAA—X—L-L—‘L—XA—LA

must answer this question before you do that.

LQDN-AOCOOD‘JCDU'I-D-WNA

I am going to order that he be prepared

and that he represent you, and that's -- that's
the court's order.
So I wi11 not order him to respond to

specific questions that you have. He wi11 respond

to the questions that he wi11 respond to, and you

can continue to fi1e what you want to fi1e, but --

MR. WANKE: We11, I'm just trying to
determine whether my case was damaged by his
actions or was it ——
THE COURT: We11, you're asking me to

give you a 1ega1 opinion, and I'm not gonna do it.

MR. WANKE: And I'm not asking you for
 13

that.
A
OQOGJNCDU‘lh-ODN
It's a matter of 1aw, and I'm trying to
determine what the 1aw is, and if I have no
resources at my disposa1 at the moment, and he

won't answer the questions, I'm -- I'm without

counse1 at 1east in that respect.

THE COURT: We11, you've made your

statement on the record.
MR. WANKE: Thank you.
THE COURT: We understand your position.
MR. WANKE: True.
THE COURT: A11 right. A11 right. So
January 27 at 9:00 o'c1ock.
MR. ZIMMERMAN: Thank you, Judge.
THE COURT: Thank you.

MR. BRUN: Is that a1so on defendant's

motion, time to11ed?
THE COURT: It is, yes.

MR. WANKE: Have a good ho1iday, your

Honor.
THE COURT: Thank you.
MR. WANKE: Thank you.

(Whereupon the defendant tendered the

assisted hearing device to the bai1iff.)
 14

(Defendant remanded.)
(Which were a11 the proceedings of record
m‘leDUT-IAOJN

heard in this cause on this date.)

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
 15
STATE OF ILLINOIS
_\.
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 17TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
000040301me
COUNTY OF WINNEBAGO
C E R T I F I C A T E
I, Joyce M. 01son, CSR, RPR, Officia1 Court
Reporter, Seventeenth Judicia1 Circuit, State of

I11inois, do hereby certify that I reported in

stenograph the testimony given at the hearing of
the said cause, and that the foregoing transcript
is a true and correct transcription of my

stenographic notes so taken as aforesaid, and

contains a11 the testimony given at the hearing of

the said cause to the best of my abi1ity.
I further certify that I am not connected by
b1ood or marriage to any of the parties in this
action, nor am I a re1ative or emp1oyee or

attorney or counse1 of any of the parties, nor am

I a re1ative or emp1oyee of such attorney or
counse1, or financia11y interested in said action,
or interested direct1y or indirect1y in the matter
in controversy.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have hereunto set my hand
this 9th day of June, A. D. 2017.

7.2...
Officia
.. m (fl/gg
Court Reporter%
V