For about 90 minutes May 1, the Riverside Brookfield High School auditorium turned into a courtroom.
About 400 students watched as three justices of the Illinois Appellate Court, including Riverside resident David Navarro, heard oral arguments in an appeal of a murder conviction.
Navarro, who grew up in Riverside and graduated from RB in 1986, arranged for the oral argument to take place at his alma mater on Law Day, an annual effort to make the legal system more accessible to ordinary citizens.
After about 35 minutes of arguments by the lawyers, who were peppered by questions from the justices, Navarro, along with fellow justices Mary Mikva and Freddrenna Lyle, along with the lawyers on the case, answered students’ questions for about 45 minutes.
“It was a great experience,” Navarro said. “The students were engaged; the lawyers made a great presentation. We had some really great questions from the students. They really paid attention and really were focused on the presentation. It was nice.”
One of the lawyers, public appellate defender Adrienne Sloan, who represented Antoine Reynolds, a man appealing his murder conviction for a 2011 shooting on the south side of Chicago, is also a Riverside resident.
Reynolds, who was convicted of murder largely on the basis of the testimony of two eyewitnesses, was appealing his conviction citing ineffective assistance of his lawyer. He claims that his trial attorney should have called an expert on eyewitness testimony to testify, because of credibility of the eyewitnesses was in question. The two eyewitnesses did not identify Reynolds as the shooter until more than three years after the shooting.
The oral argument before the justices was fairly technical, focusing on past precedents and the standards for proving ineffective assistance of counsel.
Reynolds, who was sentenced to 50 years in prison, originally drafted his own appeal, but then Sloan was assigned to represent him in the appeal. Sloan argued that if Reynold’s trial attorney had called an expert witness who would have testified about the occasional problems with eyewitness testimony, it could have changed the outcome of the trial and thus Reynolds should get a new a trial. A earlier appeal by Reynolds failed in 2021.
Cook County State’s Attorney Sara McGann argued that Reynold’s trial attorney did challenge the credibility of the eyewitnesses during the trial and simply made a strategic decision not to call an expert witness after considering doing so.
As is typical during appellate arguments, the justices peppered the lawyers with questions during the argument.
RB senior Oliver Schlesser said he found that interesting.
“It was interesting to see how they were interrupting the attorney,” Schlesser, an AP Government student, said.
After listening to the arguments and reading the briefs, the three-judge panel will make a decision that will then be published in an opinion. That process could take weeks or months.
The judges of the First Appellate Division usually hear cases in a courtroom at 160 N. LaSalle in downtown Chicago, but Navarro relished the opportunity to bring the argument to alma mater.
“It’s a chance to hold court in front of students or the public,” Navarro said. “The public can always come down to the courthouse to watch the hearings, but the truth is most people will never, unless they have a direct interest in the case, come down to the courthouse.”
The question-and-answer period was wide ranging. Students wanted to know how to become a judge. The judges pointed out that most judges in Illinois are initially elected and first have careers as lawyers. They pointed out that any college major will suffice for law school. Navarro, for example, was an English major at the University of Chicago before attending the University of Iowa College of Law. Lyle is a former Chicago alderwoman. Mikva was a theater major who tried to be actress for two years before giving up on that dream and going to Northwestern law school. She is the daughter of former congressman and federal appellate court judge Abner Mikva, was a clerk for then United States Supreme Court Justice William Brennan after law school.
“Clerking for a United States Supreme Court Justice is a big deal,” Navarro told the students.
Mikva advised anyone thinking of becoming a lawyer to major in whatever interests them the most.
One student asked Navarro what his best memories of RB were. Navarro said that he has fond memories of running cross country and track at RB, and noted that he is still friends with some of high school teammates.
Navarro’s parents, Reynaldo Navarro, 96, and Guadalupe Navarro, 93, who live in Riverside, attended the arguments and sat up front.
Navarro, who first became a judge in 2017 and was elevated to the Appellate Court in 2023, said that is important to let students see what judges and lawyers do.
“When I was at RB, I wanted to be a lawyer but I didn’t have any idea what a court hearing was, much less what an appellate argument was, so the chance to do a hearing like this so the students get a chance to see what our work is, and what the lawyers do, that’s a great opportunity,” Navarro said.
Schlesser agreed.
“This was very illuminating to see kind of the curtain revealed,” Schlesser said. “I was really grateful that we could have this experience.”
