People v. Cunningham, 052517 ILCA4, 4-14-0908

Docket Nº:4-14-0908
Opinion Judge:KNECHT, JUSTICE
Party Name:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. VICTOR R. CUNNINGHAM, Defendant-Appellant.
Judge Panel:JUSTICE KNECHT delivered the judgment of the court. Justices Steigmann and Appleton concurred in the judgment.
Case Date:May 25, 2017
Court:Court of Appeals of Illinois
 
FREE EXCERPT

2017 IL App (4th) 140908-U

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

VICTOR R. CUNNINGHAM, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 4-14-0908

Court of Appeals of Illinois, Fourth District

May 25, 2017

This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1).

Appeal from Circuit Court of Macon County No. 14CF161 Honorable Timothy J. Steadman, Judge Presiding.

JUSTICE KNECHT delivered the judgment of the court. Justices Steigmann and Appleton concurred in the judgment.

ORDER

KNECHT, JUSTICE

¶ 1 Held: The appellate court vacated fines improperly imposed by the circuit clerk; reversed and remanded with directions for the trial court to reimpose fines originally ordered by the trial court, which were not properly stated on the circuit court clerk's printout of assessments, and to amend the resentencing judgment to reflect sentence credit to defendant's domestic violence fine for custody from March 19, 2014, through September 2, 2014; and otherwise affirmed.

¶ 2 In March 2014, defendant, Victor R. Cunningham, pleaded guilty to domestic battery with four prior domestic battery convictions, a Class 2 felony (720 ILCS 5/12-3.2(a)(1)(b) (West 2014)), and the trial court sentenced him to 24 months' probation. In September 2014, the trial court revoked defendant's probation and resentenced him to four years' imprisonment and four years' mandatory supervised release. Defendant appeals to vacate fines imposed by the circuit clerk and to remand for an amended sentencing order providing additional sentence credit. On appeal, defendant argues (1) the circuit clerk improperly imposed fines without trial court authorization, (2) he is entitled to additional sentencing credit following his arrest for time he argues he was in simultaneous custody, and (3) he is entitled to $5 per day of credit for time served to be applied toward his domestic violence fines.

¶ 3 We vacate the fines entered by the circuit clerk without trial court authorization. We affirm the $20 State's Attorney assessment as properly imposed by the circuit clerk. We reverse the trial court in not applying sentence credit for his custody following his violations of a protective order toward defendant's domestic violence fine, and we remand with directions to apply additional sentence credit to the domestic violence fine in this case. We remand with directions for the trial court to reimpose fines ordered by the trial court, which were not properly stated on the circuit court clerk's printout of assessments, and to amend the resentencing judgment to reflect sentence credit toward defendant's domestic violence fine for custody from March 19, 2014, through September 2, 2014. We otherwise affirm.

¶ 4 I. BACKGROUND

¶ 5 Decatur police arrested defendant for striking his spouse in the face on January 31, 2014. The State charged defendant with domestic battery with four prior domestic battery convictions (720 ILCS 5/12-3.2(a)(1)(b) (West 2014)) in Macon County case No. 14-CF-161. Defendant remained in custody after his arrest, and on February 27, 2014, his spouse obtained an emergency order of protection against him in case No. 14-OP-68. On March 3, 2014, defendant entered a plea agreement, and the trial court sentenced defendant to 24 months' probation and three days' incarceration, and it ordered payment of a $200 domestic violence fine (730 ILCS 5/5-9-1.5 (West 2014)), a $10 domestic battery fine (730 ILCS 5/5-9-1.6 (West 2014)), a monthly probation services fee of $25 (730 ILCS 5/5-6-3(b)(2) (West 2014)), and court costs. The trial court credited defendant's three-day jail term and $160 of his fines from 32 days of sentence credit for his custody from January 31, 2014, through March 3, 2014. The State agreed to forego petitions to revoke defendant's conditional discharge in case Nos. 13-CF-830 and 13-TR-3558, and defendant was released on probation.

¶ 6 Defendant's payment status information report states the domestic battery fine is $9 and does not reference the $200 domestic violence fine imposed by the trial court. The payment status information report included the following assessments: $12 clerk op add-on and $0.25 clerk op deduction (clerk operations and administrative fund), $15 State Police operations and $10 State Police services (State Police operations and services fund), $20 State's Attorney, $4.75 drug court, $5 youth diversion, $28.50 children's advocacy center fee, $9.50 nonstandard (mental-health court), $10 medical costs, $10 anti-crime fund, $20 lump-sum surcharge, $50 court finance, $100 violent crime (violent crime victims assistance), $40 domestic violence shelter restitution services, and $248.10 SA collections.

¶ 7 In March 2014, defendant was arraigned for unlawful violation of an order of protection, case No. 14-CF-301, following his arrest for calling his spouse on March 12, 2014. His arraignment led the State to file its first petition charging a violation of probation on March 19, 2014. He was again arrested after calling his spouse from the Macon County jail on March 27, 2014. On April 4, 2014, the State filed an information charging defendant with unlawful violation of an order of protection with a prior domestic battery conviction, No. 14-CF-370. On April 4, 2014, the State filed a second petition charging a violation of probation for defendant's second order of protection violation. In June 2014, the State withdrew its first petition and proved the allegations in its second petition by a preponderance of the evidence.

¶ 8 In September 2014, the trial court terminated defendant's probation and vacated his monthly probation services fees at a sentencing hearing. The court resentenced defendant to a four-year prison term, followed by four years of mandatory supervised release. The trial...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP