Conflict of interest leads to new trial in Woodford County homicide case

The Illinois 4th District Appellate Court has overturned a Woodford County woman's murder conviction .

Maya Nodine will be granted a new trial in the death of 47-year-old Joy Hattan . Nodine had been convicted of first-degree murder after she drove into oncoming traffic in an attempt to kill herself and struck Hattan's vehicle in December 2021.

The appellate court found several issues with the trial when Nodine was convicted in 2023, and reversed the decision because Nodine's attorney had a conflict of interest.

The appellate court's opinion further stated the trial court erred when it barred expert testimony for the defense, failed to handle aspects of the jury properly and violated Nodine's right to counsel.

Nodine's new trial will be the third in the case.

What happened in the death of Joy Hattan?

Nodine told police she swerved her vehicle into oncoming traffic in an attempt to kill herself on the night of Dec. 16, 2021.

In court, Nodine said she did not leave her home that day with the intent to kill herself. However, she had an argument with her mother that day. The parent was concerned that Nodine could get into trouble for hanging out with a 16-year-old girl, according to an appellate court document.

Nodine became frustrated and turned to her marijuana dab pen for comfort, but it was not working. So, she left the residence.

While driving, she had a panic attack and claimed her mind went blank before she swerved into oncoming traffic. An expert from the Illinois State Police traffic reconstruction unit determined Nodine had reached a speed of 94 mph before the crash.

She said in court that the idea of hurting someone else did not cross her mind until the crash was over.

Previous reporting: 'She was my rock': Amid COVID-19 and fatal crash, Illinois family struggles forward

Maya Nodine's first and second trial

In September 2022, a jury found Nodine guilty of first-degree murder but also found her to be mentally ill.

However, that trial was thrown out because of an error made by the judge in replacing an excused juror. A new trial was granted because the judge did not ask the replacement juror if they had followed instructions.

Ahead of the second trial, multiple issues surfaced, according to an appellate court document. Nodine's attorney, Maureen Williams, had been in legal trouble herself, convicted of forgery in 2021. Judge Charles Feeney sentenced Williams to 24 months of second-chance probation, ending Feb. 25, 2023.

Feeney was also overseeing Nodine's case. On Feb. 14, 2023, Williams filed a motion to substitute the judge from Nodine's case. Yet, before the motion could be reviewed, Williams filed a motion to withdraw from the case on Feb. 23, 2023. Nodine wanted a new lawyer, but the motion was denied.

On Feb. 15, 2023, the Woodford County State's Attorney's Office filed a petition to revoke Williams' probation.

Despite all of this, Nodine's second trial began in March 2023 with Williams as her lawyer and Feeney presiding. Nodine appealed her conviction, citing Williams had a conflict of interest with the court and was not able to provide adequate defense.

The appellate court agreed.

Related: Suspended attorney also faces Woodford County probation revocation

Conflict of interest 'clearly affected' attorney

Under Illinois law, Williams had a "per se conflict of interest in this case because the same state’s attorney’s office was attempting to revoke her second-chance felony probation while simultaneously prosecuting her client," according to the appellate court.

The appellate court further stated: "Unfortunately because no one brought the State’s filing of the petition to revoke to Judge Feeney’s attention and Judge Feeney did not recognize the potential problems in this case when attorney Williams entered her appearance for defendant, the trial court never admonished defendant about the potential for a conflict at the beginning of the case or that a per se conflict was present once the State filed the petition to revoke."

The appellate court's opinion also stated the evidence presented at trial was "insufficient" in its ability to prove that Nodine was "consciously aware of risk involved to another."

The conflict of interest "clearly affected" Williams' performance at the sentencing in which the trial court imposed too harsh of a sentence, the appellate court stated. The defendant was young and had expressed mental health issues, but Williams "inexplicably failed to present any evidence in mitigation on defendant’s behalf."

Nodine's appeal was successful, but because the 4th District Appellate Court felt the prosecution had presented enough evidence of Nodine's guilt, she was not barred from double jeopardy. She is slated to receive a new attorney and trial.

This article originally appeared on Journal Star: Conflict of interest leads to new trial in Woodford County homicide case