In re N.G.
72 N.E.3d 436
Ill. App. Ct.2017Background
- Juvenile petition (2011) alleged neglect; mother admitted; minor adjudicated neglected and made a ward of the court. Father (respondent Floyd F.) was found unfit and later faced a termination-of-parental-rights petition (Feb 2016).
- State sought termination based on a rebuttable presumption of depravity under the Adoption Act, relying on father’s three Illinois felony convictions (2008 AUUW; 2009 UUW by a felon; 2011 armed habitual criminal).
- At the termination hearing the State introduced certified copies of all three convictions; defense objected to the 2008 conviction because the statutory subsection under which he pled guilty was later declared facially unconstitutional in People v. Aguilar.
- Appellate court supplemented the record with Will County criminal-court documents showing the 2008 plea and judgment expressly cited the subsection invalidated by Aguilar; the court found no dispute that the 2008 conviction was under the invalidated provision.
- Applying Illinois precedent on void judgments, the appellate court held the 2008 conviction was void ab initio and could not be counted toward the three-felony deprivation presumption; it vacated the 2008 conviction, reversed the unfitness and best-interest findings, and remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the 2008 AUUW conviction (under a subsection later declared facially unconstitutional) may be used to establish the three-felony depravity presumption in a termination proceeding | The State: the conviction remains valid unless vacated by a court; Aguilar did not automatically vacate prior convictions; defendant must pursue direct or collateral relief in criminal proceedings | Floyd: the 2008 conviction is void ab initio because the statute subsection was declared facially unconstitutional in Aguilar and thus cannot support the deprivation presumption | The appellate court vacated the 2008 conviction as void ab initio and held it cannot be used to sustain the depravity presumption; reversed unfitness and best-interest findings and remanded |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Aguilar, 2013 IL 112116 (Illinois Supreme Court) (held the specified AUUW statutory subsection facially unconstitutional)
- People v. McFadden, 2016 IL 117424 (Illinois Supreme Court) (discussed effect of later-invalidated predicate convictions and limits on treating prior convictions as vacated)
- People v. Castleberry, 2015 IL 116916 (Illinois Supreme Court) (abolished the void-sentence rule for certain collateral challenges)
- People v. Ernest Thompson, 209 Ill. 2d 19 (Illinois Supreme Court) (void orders may be attacked at any time; courts have duty to vacate void orders)
- People v. Dennis Thompson, 2015 IL 118151 (Illinois Supreme Court) (described three categories of voidness; facially unconstitutional statutes create void-ab-initio judgments)
- People v. Burns, 2015 IL 117837 (Illinois Supreme Court) (applied Aguilar principles)
- People v. Stoffel, 239 Ill. 2d 314 (Illinois Supreme Court) (recognizes appellate discretion to decide merits in the interest of judicial economy)
- Obergefell v. Hodges, 135 S. Ct. 2584 (U.S. Supreme Court 2015) (recognition of the fundamental importance of parental rights)