Criminal Law

In a case of first impression, the appellate court considered whether a defendant is entitled to return of funds paid when a defendant is ordered to pay court costs, fees, and restitution but the conviction is subsequently vacated and, if so, what procedure should be followed. The appellate court held that the funds must be returned by the circuit court and further held that substantial procedural hurdles may not be imposed on a defendant’s right to return of the funds. (GAMRATH, concurring and HYMAN, specially concurring)

Defendant pleaded guilty to unlawful possession of a weapon by a felon and was sentenced to 10 years in prison. He subsequently filed a post-plea motion asserting that he was entitled to additional pre-sentence credit for completing county educational programs while in jail. The circuit court denied the motion and defendant appealed. The appellate court affirmed, finding that the documentation provided by defendant did not establish that he qualified under the statute or rules for the educational credit. (HOWSE and COBBS, concurring)

Defendant was convicted of unlawful use or possession of a weapon by a felon and four counts of aggravated unlawful use of a weapon by a felon and was sentenced to seven years in prison. On appeal, defendant argued that the State failed to prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, that the trial court improperly admitted evidence, the trial court was biased against him and interfered with his right to confront witnesses, and that the UPWF statute violates the second amendment. The appellate court affirmed, finding the evidence sufficient and no errors in the admission of evidence and that the UPWF statute was constitutional as applied to the defendant. (GAMRATH, concurring and HYMAN, dissenting)

Defendant was found guilty by a jury of multiple counts of solicitation of murder and solicitation of murder for hire based on evidence that he had sought to arrange for the murders of a judge and Assistant State’s Attorney while he was in jail and awaiting trial on other charges. Defendant was sentenced to concurrent 40-year prison terms and defendant appealed. On appeal, defendant argued that the State failed to prove him guilty of soliciting a murder for hire beyond a reasonable doubt because the prosecution failed to prove that defendant procured an actual “hitman,” where the person defendant attempted to hire was an undercover officer who had no intent of following through with the murders. Defendant also argued that trial counsel was ineffective when he failed to request a jury instruction defining the word “procure.” The appellate court found that a rational trier of fact could have found defendant guilty of procuring an individual to commit first degree murder pursuant to an agreement for money and that defendant did not establish that his counsel’s performance was deficient. However, the appellate court did remand for a hearing on defendant’s additional allegation of ineffective assistance of counsel relating to counsel’s failure to object to the State’s impeachment of him with evidence of post-arrest silence. (C.A. WALKER and HYMAN, concurring)

Defendant entered a negotiated guilty plea to one count of aggravated driving under the influence of alcohol and was sentenced to 24 months of probation. On appeal, defendant argued that the trial court failed to properly admonish him under SCR 605(c) of his right to counsel to assist him with the preparation of a motion to withdraw his plea. The appellate court agreed that the admonitions were deficient and remanded for further proceedings consistent with the requirements SCR 505(c). (McLAREN and HUTSCHINSON, concurring)