People v. Adame
94 N.E.3d 248
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2018Background
- Adame was tried for theft; jury acquitted him of taking an engine and convicted him of taking a credenza. The trial court later reduced the conviction to misdemeanor theft because the State failed to prove the credenza was worth over $500.
- At trial the only evidence of value was an online listing for a new, different-style credenza priced at $1,099.99; the victim testified her actual 10-year-old maple credenza was not the listing.
- At sentencing the court ordered $1,100 restitution (without additional evidence) and imposed a $250 public-defender reimbursement fee; defendant had filed a certificate of assets claiming minimal income and public benefits.
- Defendant did not object to restitution or the fee at sentencing. He appealed, challenging the restitution award, the public-defender fee (and possible duplication), and two $12 statutory assessments.
- The appellate court vacated the restitution order and the public-defender fee and remanded for a proper restitution determination and a proper hearing on the public-defender fee; it reduced each $12 assessment to $7.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether restitution for $1,100 was proper after court found value not proven > $500 | State implicitly: restitution may be ordered and evidence in PSI can support amount | Restitution was unsupported by evidence and punished defendant for felony theft he was acquitted of | Vacated restitution as plain error; remand for new restitution hearing |
| Whether counsel’s failure to challenge restitution was ineffective assistance | — | Alternatively, counsel was ineffective for not objecting to restitution amount | Court did not address ineffective-assistance claim because restitution vacated on plain-error grounds |
| Whether court complied with statute in imposing $250 public-defender reimbursement fee | State: some form of hearing occurred and fee not duplicative; remand if hearing insufficient | Fee invalid without required statutory hearing into ability to pay; possibly duplicative | Vacated fee and remanded for a proper hearing on ability to pay; duplication to be considered on remand |
| Whether two $12 assessments must be reduced | State agreed assessments should match county rate | Assessments exceeded county-established $7 rate | Reduced both assessments to $7 each |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Jones, 206 Ill. App. 3d 477 (App. Ct. Ill.) (restitution unsupported by evidence can be reversible error)
- People v. Lewis, 234 Ill. 2d 32 (Ill. 2009) (imposition of fines/fees without evidentiary support can constitute second-prong plain error affecting fairness of sentencing)
- People v. Bradford, 207 Ill. App. 3d 436 (App. Ct. Ill.) (trial court exceeded restitution authority by ordering restitution for acts not the subject of conviction)
- People v. McClard, 359 Ill. App. 3d 914 (App. Ct. Ill.) (restitution based on nol-prossed charges impermissible)
- People v. Owens, 323 Ill. App. 3d 222 (App. Ct. Ill.) (restitution may not be imposed for charges on which defendant was acquitted)