People v. Davis
2025 IL App (5th) 240840-U
Ill. App. Ct.2025Background
- Michael C. Davis pleaded guilty to harassment through electronic communications (a Class 4 felony) in 2021 and received one year of conditional discharge as part of a fully negotiated plea agreement.
- His conditional discharge was revoked in December 2022 after the State proved he failed to obtain a substance-abuse evaluation, a required condition.
- Davis was resentenced to 64 months’ imprisonment, based in part on the seriousness of his prior criminal history and the impact on the victim, Jennifer Arnett.
- Davis, via appointed counsel, filed a motion to reconsider the sentence, arguing his rehabilitative potential due to substance abuse and mental health issues; the court denied the motion, focusing on protection of the public and the victim.
- On appeal, counsel filed an Anders motion, asserting no nonfrivolous issues; Davis did not respond pro se.
- The appellate court reviewed the record and affirmed both the appellate counsel’s withdrawal and the circuit court’s judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Can the underlying 2021 plea and sentence be challenged in this appeal? | Judgment proper and final; cannot be revisited absent voidness | N/A (Defendant did not directly challenge) | Underlying plea/sentence could not be challenged; no voidness shown |
| Whether the State proved violation of conditional discharge | Conditions were violated (specifically lack of evaluation) | N/A (Defendant did not contest evidence) | Sufficient evidence supported revocation |
| Whether sentence of 64 months after revocation was an abuse of discretion | Sentence proper, within statutory limits, justified by record | Sentence did not consider rehabilitation | Sentence within statutory range; no abuse of discretion |
| Whether any nonfrivolous appellate issues existed | No meritorious issues | N/A | None found; Anders motion granted |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Gregory, 379 Ill. App. 3d 414 (Ill. App. Ct. 2008) (underlying judgments on conditional discharge not reviewable after time to appeal has expired, absent voidness)
- People v. Clark, 313 Ill. App. 3d 957 (Ill. App. Ct. 2000) (revocation of conditional discharge reviewed for manifest weight of the evidence)
- People v. Stacey, 193 Ill. 2d 203 (Ill. 2000) (sentences within statutory limits upheld unless manifestly disproportionate)
- People v. Perruquet, 68 Ill. 2d 149 (Ill. 1977) (trial court has great discretion in sentencing decisions)