Criminal - Post Conviction Proceedings/ 2-1401 Motions
1st Dist. People v. Escobedo, No. 1-05-2229 (October 19, 2007) 5th div. (TULLY) (Mod) Vacated and remanded
Because trial court failed to notify defendant of its intention to re-characterize his 2-1401 motion as post conviction petition, warn him of consequences with regards to rule against successive post conviction petitions, and give him opportunity to withdraw or amend his petition, order dismissing his 2-1401 petition must be vacated, since Shellstrom requirements are not subject to harmless error analyses. However, it did not err when it dismissed his simultaneously filed post conviction petition as frivolous; because error associated with failure to deal with sleeping juror is waived. It could have been easily corrected at trial by bringing matter to court's attention.

Criminal - Statutory Summary Suspensions/ Dui
2nd Dist. People v. Marsala, No. 2-06-1044 (October 24, 2007) McHenry County (McLAREN) Reversed
Trial court erred when it granted petition to rescind statutory summary suspension based exclusively on police officer's testimony that he did not see defendant driving his vehicle prior to stopping him and testing his breath for alcohol. Defendant failed to make a prima facie case that officer lacked probable cause to believe that he was in actual physical control of a vehicle while he was intoxicated.

Criminal - Aggravated Dui/ Ineffectiveness Of Counsel / Fines
1st Dist. People v. Diaz, No. 1-06-2690 (November 5, 2007) 1st div. (R. GORDON) Affirmed as modified
Evidence that officer curbed defendant for failure to wear seat belt, smelled moderate odor of alcohol, noticed that defendant had slurred speech, staggered, and was unable to perform one leg test, are sufficient to find defendant guilty of DUI. Evidence that his driver's license was revoked because of two prior DUI convictions is sufficient to find him guilty of felony Aggravated DUI. Further, although police officer violated defendant's due process rights when, after giving Miranda warnings and defendant indicated he wanted to make no more statements, police officer immediately asked him whether he had been drinking, defendant was not deprived of effective assistance of counsel because counsel could have determined that statement would be helpful. In addition, admission of testimony with regards to HGN Nystagmus test without Frye hearing could have been intended by defense counsel as opening door to impeach police officer. However, trial court erred when it assesse! d DUI lab fee when no lab tests were performed and failed to give defendant credit for time served against $1,000 DUI fine.

Criminal - Guilty Pleas/ Sentencing
4th Dist. People v. Collier, No. 4-06-0981 (November 6, 2007) Champaign County (COOK) Vacated and remanded
Trial court erred when, after accepting defendant's guilty plea to obstructing justice with a recommendation from the State that her sentence would be capped at 2 yrs, it sentenced her to an extended term of 4 yrs, after defendant failed to show up for her sentencing hearing. Although trial court admonished her after accepting guilty plea that it would not limit her sentence to State's recommendation if she did not show up for sentencing hearing, it could not make its acceptance of the plea conditional after it accepted it.

Criminal - Murder/ Jury Deliberations / Closing argument
1st Dist. People v. Love, No. 1-06-0446 (November 5, 2007) 1st div. (WOLFSON) Affirmed
After defendant was arrested for murder, line-up identification was not unreasonably suggested merely because defendant was only subject with braids. Further, testimony that fingerprints did not match defendant's major case cards was not suggestive of other crimes; and prosecutor's comments during closing were not improper. Further, trial court did not unreasonably pressure minority jurors when it directed them to 'keep deliberating' rather than give Prim instruction or allow defendant's motion to declare hung jury.

Criminal - Sentencing/ U U W / Double enhancement
1st Dist. People v. Owens, No. 1-06-0445 (November 5, 2007) 1st div. (WOLFSON) Vacated and remanded
Defendant's two prior class 2 felony convictions could not be used to simultaneously enhance the offense, aggregated UUW, with which he was charged from a Class 4 to a Class 2 felony, and enhance the sentencing range from Class 2 to a Class X. Further, even though the sentence, 7 years, is within the permissible range for Class 2 felonies, it must nevertheless be vacated because of the trial court's reliance on the wrong sentencing range when imposing its sentence.

Criminal - Speedy Trial
4th Dist. People v. Gay , No. 4-05-0915 (November 6, 2007) Livingston County (COOK) Affirmed
Defendant, inmate at Pontiac Correctional Facility, was not deprived of his rights to a speedy trial when he was tried in order of cases on which he had made demand under Speedy Trial Act; but failed to include all of his pending charges in speedy trial demand that he made in present case. Defendant cannot escape sequential requirement of Section 103-5 of Code by omitting reference to all pending cases therein.

Criminal - Impeachment
4th Dist. People v. Farrell, No. 4-06-0945 (November 16, 2007) Sangamon County (COOK) Affirmed
Trial court did not abuse its discretion when it allowed State to use 1988 conviction to impeach defendant, even though it was imposed more than 10 years earlier, when defendant was released from incarceration within 10 years, although sentence for subject offense was 5 yr. term served concurrently with more serous 25 yr. term.

Criminal - Probation Revocation
2nd Dist. People v. Jones, No. 2-05-1135 (November 14, 2007) DuPage County (McLAREN) Affirmed
Trial court did not abuse its discretion when it revoked defendant's probation for failure to report to probation department. Defendant admitted that he did not report to probation; and State was not required to prove willfulness. Further, defendant failed to explain how his indigence prevented him from reporting; especially since he did not request assistance with transportation from probation department.

Criminal - Rule 137 Sanctions/ D U I
2nd Dist. People v. Stefanski, No. 2-06-1176 (November 26, 2007) McHenry County (CALLUM) Affirmed
Although it was error for the trial court to impose Rule 137 sanctions on the State for needlessly increasing the cost of litigation at the same time that it found that the notices were sent without any bad faith; it was nevertheless not reversible error; because repeated improper notices were not warranted by existing law.

Criminal - Search and Seizure
People v. Bridgewater, No. No. 10575. Appeal, 3rd Dist. This case presents question as to whether trial court properly granted defendant's motion to suppress evidence seized from defendant's vehicle after defendant had been stopped for speeding and after defendant had left his vehicle? Record indicated that defendant was arrested for resisting police officer after defendant had refused officer's order to come back to his car and produce license and proof of insurance, and Appellate Court, in reversing trial court, found that officers were justified under Thornton in conducting search of defendant's vehicle incident to his arrest.

Criminal - Search and Seizure
People v. Bailey, No. No. 105457. Appeal, 2nd Dist.This case presents question as to whether police may conduct warrant check of passenger in vehicle and conduct search of said vehicle based upon existence of warrant and arrest of passenger where initial traffic stop was generated solely by seat belt violations? Appellate Court found that 4th Amendment generally allows expeditious warrant checks during traffic stops, and that section 12-603.1(f) of Vehicle Code did not bar police from conducting instant warrant check.

Criminal - Due Process
People v. Robinson, No. No. 105206. Appeal, 1st Dist.This case presents question as to whether defendant was denied due process when, during trial on murder charge, he was convicted of involuntary murder of household member where victim's household status was not included in indictment, and where trial court subsequently found at sentencing hearing that victim was household member for purposes of imposing enhanced sentence? Appellate Court, in affirming defendant's conviction and sentence, found that victim's household status is not element of involuntary manslaughter charge for purposes of included-offense analysis, and that State was not required to give him notice of any enhanced range of sentences when defendant requested that he be found guilty of lesser-included of! fense of involuntary manslaughter.

Search and Seizure
People v. Bailey, No. No. 105457. Appeal, 2nd Dist.This case presents question as to whether police may conduct warrant check of passenger in vehicle and conduct search of said vehicle based upon existence of warrant and arrest of passenger where initial traffic stop was generated solely by seat belt violations? Appellate Court found that 4th Amendment generally allows expeditious warrant checks during traffic stops, and that section 12-603.1(f) of Vehicle Code did not bar police from conducting instant warrant check.