Background

• Defendant Guadarrama was arrested on November 4, 2005 for unlawful possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver and remained in custody until bond on April 13, 2006.
• He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 48 months of intensive supervision; after violations, he was sentenced to four years' imprisonment on September 19, 2009.
• At sentencing, the court and clerk imposed several assessments: Crime Stoppers fine $500, DNA analysis fee $200, mental health court fine $10, street-value of drugs seized fine $200, and Trauma Center Fund fine $100.
• Guadarrama sought a $5-per-day credit for 194 days in custody prior to sentencing; argued the mental health and Trauma fines were improper and could be vacated and reimposed, offsetting by the credit.
• The State agreed to the 194-day credit and to vacate/reimpose the mental health court and Trauma Center Fund fines; the State contended the DNA analysis fee was not eligible for monetary credit because it is a fee, not a fine.
• The central issue was whether the DNA analysis fee is a fee or a fine for purposes of section 110-14(a) credits.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• People v. Graves, 235 Ill.2d 244 (2009) (mental health and other fines subject to monetary credit)
• People v. Jones, 223 Ill.2d 569 (2006) (authority to vacate/reimpose fines for credit purposes)
• People v. White, 333 Ill.App.3d 777 (2002) (fine vs. fee distinction; cost as collateral)
• People v. Marshall, 242 Ill.2d 285 (2011) (DNA analysis fee is a fee, not punishment; informs fee/fine classification)
• People v. Long, 398 Ill.App.3d 1028 (2010) (identified DNA fee as more akin to a fee)
• People v. Clark, 404 Ill.App.3d 141 (2010) (DNA fee characterization reinforcing fee nature)
• People v. Mingo, 403 Ill.App.3d 968 (2010) (DNA fee analysis in the fee/fine framework)