People v. Dryden
980 N.E.2d 203
Ill. App. Ct.2012Background
- Dryden pleaded guilty to aggravated DUI (20-year sentence).
- Postplea counsel moved to withdraw plea and reconsider sentence; motion alleged involuntary plea based on attorney’s guarantee of 8–10 year sentence and excessive sentence afterwards.
- Rule 604(d) certificate stated counsel consulted with defendant in person to ascertain defendant’s claim of error in the entry of the plea, but omits contentions of error in the sentence.
- Trial court denied motion; defendant appealed seeking new hearing.
- Court held Rule 604(d) certificate was not strict compliance; remanded for valid certificate, new motion (if necessary), and new hearing.
- Decision vacated and remanded per Lindsey to cure Rule 604(d) certificate and proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Rule 604(d) certificate complied. | People contends certificate omits sentence-contentions. | Dryden argues certificate insufficient because it doesn’t specify sentencing-contentions. | Remand required for a valid certificate. |
| Whether lack of explicit sentence-contentions in the certificate requires remand. | Posted contentions should be ascertainable from the motion. | Certificate must explicitly cover sentence-contentions. | Remand required; certificate must cover sentencing-contentions. |
| Whether the disjunctive phrasing of Rule 604(d) means “or” should be read as “and.” | State’s interpretation would allow partial compliance. | Counsel must address all relevant errors when both plea withdrawal and sentence reconsideration are pursued. | Or means and in this context; remand sustained. |
| Scope of remand? | Remand to cure certificate and allow new motion/hearing. | N/A | Remand for valid certificate, new motion if needed, and hearing. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Love, 385 Ill. App. 3d 736 (2008) (strict compliance required with Rule 604(d))
- People v. Dismuke, 355 Ill. App. 3d 606 (2005) (certificate insufficient if it omits subject matter of consultation)
- People v. Prather, 379 Ill. App. 3d 763 (2008) (certificate must show consultation about contentions of error in sentence and plea)
- People v. Richard, 2012 IL App (5th) 100302 (2012) (certificate must show ascertained contentions in sentence and plea (nonconstitutional))
- People v. Lindsey, 239 Ill. 2d 522 (2011) (remand when Rule 604(d) certificate noncompliant)