People v. Cisco
123 N.E.3d 1258
Ill. App. Ct.2019Background
- Defendant Richard Cisco was charged with unlawful restraint (felony), violation of an order of protection, and domestic battery; misdemeanor counts were later elevated to felonies (counts IV and V) based on a prior order-of-protection conviction.
- Trial evidence showed Cisco forced entry into the victim’s home, assaulted her (bruising), threatened occupants, took her keys and phone, and later made numerous harassing phone calls. Jury convicted him of felony domestic battery and felony violation of an order of protection; acquitted on unlawful restraint.
- At sentencing the court imposed an "extended-term" 6-year sentence for domestic battery and 3 years for the order-of-protection violation, to run consecutively; court orally awarded 95 days credit and $475 monetary credit toward fines.
- Defense alerted the court post-sentencing that Cisco was not eligible for an extended-term sentence because his prior felony resulted in "second chance probation" (no final judgment of guilt entered); the trial court denied reconsideration.
- On appeal the State conceded Cisco was not extended-term eligible; the appellate court reduced the domestic-battery term to the maximum nonextended term (3 years), affirmed the remainder of the judgment, and remanded to correct written fine orders to reflect $475 credit.
Issues
| Issue | People’s Argument | Cisco’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court could impose an extended-term sentence for domestic battery | Extended-term was appropriate under the charging instrument and court discretion | Not eligible for extended term because prior felony resulted in second chance probation and no judgment of guilt was entered | Court: Defendant not extended-term eligible; reduce 6-year term to 3 years (maximum nonextended term) |
| Whether aggregate sentence (maximum consecutive terms) was excessive | Sentence within statutory range and justified by defendant’s criminal history, multiple protection orders, post-offense threats | Sentence excessive given lack of prior formal felony convictions, mitigating background, rehabilitative potential | Court: No abuse of discretion; maximum lawful (nonextended) sentences and consecutive imposition upheld |
| Whether defendant is entitled to $475 monetary credit against fines for 95 days in custody pre-sentencing | Court’s oral ruling granted $475 credit; State did not contest credit on appeal | Written fine orders omitted the credit; defendant sought correction | Court: Oral pronouncement controls; remand to modify written orders to reflect $475 credit under 725 ILCS 5/110-14(a) |
| Whether appellate counsel delay warranted special relief / expedited mandate | State conceded sentencing error; no special position on counsel delay | OSAD’s briefing delay nearly 22 months; defendant sought expedition to avoid extra incarceration | Court reduced sentence immediately, remanded for clerical correction, criticized OSAD delay and urged triage procedures but did not grant additional relief beyond correction and expedited mandate |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Smith, 345 Ill. App. 3d 179 (discussing review of unauthorized sentences)
- People v. Taylor, 368 Ill. App. 3d 703 (reducing an improperly extended term to the maximum nonextended term when intent is clear)
- People v. Shaw, 351 Ill. App. 3d 1087 (mitigating factors do not outweigh offense seriousness as a matter of right)
- People v. Pippen, 324 Ill. App. 3d 649 (existence of mitigating factors does not require reducing a sentence from the statutory maximum)
- People v. Roberson, 401 Ill. App. 3d 758 (oral pronouncement controls over conflicting written order)
- People v. Caballero, 228 Ill. 2d 79 (monetary credit under section 110-14 may be raised at any time)
- People v. Lawson, 102 N.E.3d 761 (appellate discussion of sentencing factors and weighing mitigation)
- People v. McGuire, 92 N.E.3d 494 (deference to trial court sentencing absent abuse of discretion)