People v. Lowe

── People v. Lowe ── Court: Appellate Court of Illinois Date: May 26, 2026 Category: General 2026 IL App (1st) 242190-U No. 1-24-2190 May 26, 2026 First Division NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and is not precedent except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1). ______________________________________________________________________________ IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST DISTRICT ______________________________________________________________________________ THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) Appeal from the ) Circuit Court of Plaintiff-Appellee, ) Cook County. ) v. ) No. 24 CR 908 ) STEVE LOWE, ) Honorable ) Michael R. Clancy, Defendant-Appellant. ) Judge Presiding. JUSTICE HOWSE delivered the judgment of the court. Presiding Justice Fitzgerald Smith and Justice Cobbs concurred in the judgment. ORDER ¶1 Held: Defendant’s conviction for armed habitual criminal is affirmed where his facial and as-applied constitutional challenges to the underlying statute lack merit. ¶2 Following a jury trial, defendant Steve Lowe was found guilty of armed habitual criminal (AHC) (720 ILCS 5/24-1.7(a) (West 2022)) and sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment. On appeal, citing New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n, Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022), defendant argues that No. 1-24-2190 the AHC statute violates the second amendment of the United States Constitution (U.S. Const., amend. II) on its face and as applied to him as a non-violent felon. We affirm. ¶3 Defendant was charged with multiple offenses arising from an incident on December 27, 2023. The State proceeded on one count of AHC, predicated on defendant possessing a firearm after having been convicted of two drug-related offenses. Because defendant does not challenge the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain his conviction, we recount the facts to the extent necessary to resolve the issue raised on appeal. ¶4 At trial, Sergeant Christopher Rodriguez testified that on December 27, 2023, at approximately 3:06 a.m., he responded to a dispatch regarding a person with a firearm at a gas station on Cottage Grove Avenue in Chicago, Illinois. There, Rodriguez observed defendant standing near a vehicle by an air pump. The gas station attendant told Rodriguez that the person by the air pump had a firearm in his waistband, and pointed in defendant’s direction. Defendant was wearing a darker brown fur coat over a lighter-colored jacket. ¶5 Rodriguez waited in his vehicle for additional units to arrive and maintained a view of defendant, who drove away. Rodriguez followed and activated his emergency lights. Defendant stopped his vehicle and fled on foot. Rodriguez gave chase. During the pursuit, defendant removed the dark brown coat after it “appeared to either be caught on or was being hung on [a] fence.” After defendant was apprehended, Rodriguez noticed a firearm on the ground near defendant’s coat. ¶6 Officer Gabriel Astudillo testified that he saw Rodriguez chasing defendant and also gave chase. Defendant initially wore a brown fur coat. After losing sight of defendant for a “brief second,” Astudillo s