People v. Geiler
2016 IL 119095
| Ill. | 2016Background
- On May 5, 2014 Christopher Geiler received a speeding citation from Troy, Illinois police; the citation was not filed with the Madison County circuit court clerk until May 9, 2014.
- Illinois Supreme Court Rule 552 requires the arresting officer to transmit specified portions of a ticket to the circuit court clerk within 48 hours after the arrest.
- Geiler moved to dismiss, submitting multiple Troy tickets as evidence of a recurring late-filing practice; the trial court found a “clear and consistent violation” of Rule 552 and dismissed the citation.
- The Fifth District appellate court affirmed, relying on People v. Hanna to permit dismissal when there is a pattern of repeated Rule 552 violations without requiring a showing of prejudice.
- The State appealed to the Illinois Supreme Court. The Supreme Court held Rule 552 is directory, not mandatory, and reversed: dismissal is not automatic for a Rule 552 violation; relief requires a showing of prejudice absent deliberate, ongoing violations.
- The Court remanded for further proceedings consistent with its conclusion that the two-day delay here did not prejudice Geiler and did not warrant dismissal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (People) | Defendant's Argument (Geiler) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the 48-hour timing requirement in Rule 552 mandatory or directory? | Rule 552 should be treated as directory; but if directory, dismissal still appropriate when pattern of violations harms court administration. | Rule 552 violations warrant dismissal when there is a clear and consistent/patterned noncompliance (relying on Hanna). | Rule 552 is directory; the presumption that procedural commands to officials are directory applies. |
| Does a clear, consistent pattern of Rule 552 violations permit dismissal without a showing of prejudice? | Even for directory rules, courts may dismiss only if defendant shows prejudice; automatic dismissal is improper absent prejudice unless violations are deliberate and ongoing. | Where there is a pattern of clear and consistent violations, dismissal is permitted without a showing of prejudice. | Dismissal is not automatic for a pattern of violations; absent deliberate, ongoing flouting of the rule, defendant must show prejudice to obtain dismissal. In this case, no prejudice shown. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Ziobro, 242 Ill. 2d 34 (estate law framework on directory/mandatory rules; requires showing of prejudice for directory-rule violations)
- People v. Delvillar, 235 Ill. 2d 507 (presumption that procedural commands are directory; exceptions narrowly applied)
- People v. Robinson, 217 Ill. 2d 43 (directory-rule violation does not automatically require dismissal; focus on whether rights are ordinarily injured)
- People v. Hanna, 185 Ill. App. 3d 404 (appellate decision permitting dismissal where there is a clear and consistent, ongoing violation of Rule 552)
- Village of Park Forest v. Fagan, 64 Ill. 2d 264 (principle that mere violation of procedural rule ordinarily does not injure public interest or private rights)