In the case of People v. Demon L. Knight, the defendant faced serious charges stemming from an incident on October 2, 2017. Knight was accused of discharging a firearm in the direction of State Trooper Matt Bradford while the trooper was performing his official duties. Following his arrest, a grand jury indicted Knight on multiple charges, including aggravated discharge of a firearm, attempted murder, and unlawful possession of a weapon by a felon.
As the case progressed, concerns arose regarding Knight’s mental fitness to stand trial. The court ordered a psychological evaluation, and Dr. Cuneo assessed Knight, ultimately determining that he was fit for trial. Despite being appointed legal counsel, Knight expressed a desire to represent himself and frequently clashed with his attorney. He alleged ineffective assistance of counsel, claiming that his lawyer was not acting in his best interest and that he felt coerced into decisions.
Knight’s courtroom behavior and filings were consistent with the sovereign citizen movement. He filed numerous pro se documents challenging the court’s jurisdiction over him, asserting that he never consented to the proceedings and that the laws did not apply to him. Knight referenced the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), claiming that all crimes were contractual and that he was an “unfranchised” individual not subject to the court’s authority. He spoke of a “straw man” legal theory, argued that the court was operating under maritime law, and insisted he was the beneficiary of a trust, not the person charged.
During hearings, Knight questioned the court’s legitimacy, accused it of practicing law from the bench, and alleged that his rights were being violated. Despite his objections, Knight eventually entered a negotiated guilty plea to the charge of aggravated discharge of a firearm, with the State agreeing to dismiss the other charges. The plea agreement stipulated a sentencing range between 20 and 40 years in prison.
Before sentencing, Knight filed multiple motions to withdraw his guilty plea, claiming it was made under duress, coercion, and intimidation. He continued to challenge the court’s jurisdiction and the validity of the proceedings. The court held hearings to address his claims, including allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel. After evaluating the evidence and testimonies, the court found no merit in Knight’s claims and proceeded to sentencing.
Knight was sentenced to 40 years in prison. The court properly informed him of his right to appeal and the necessity of filing a motion to withdraw his guilty plea within 30 days if he wished to challenge the conviction. Knight did not file such a motion after sentencing.
On appeal, Knight argued that the trial court failed to properly admonish him according to Illinois Supreme Court Rule 605 and that the court abused its discretion in finding him fit to stand trial. However, the appellate court dismissed his appeal due to noncompliance with Rule 604(d), which requires a defendant to file a post-sentencing motion to withdraw a guilty plea before appealing.