People v. Gunderson
2017 IL App (1st) 153533
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2017Background
- In 2002 Sean Gunderson attacked family members; after a bench trial he was found not guilty by reason of insanity and committed to the Department of Human Services (DHS). He remained confined since 2005.
- In April 2015 Gunderson petitioned for discharge and for on-grounds pass privileges; several treatment staff recommended on-grounds passes but not discharge.
- Expert testimony conflicted: Dr. Markos testified Gunderson still showed signs of schizophrenia and needed lifelong antipsychotics; Drs. Gill and Watson and staff testified Gunderson showed no current symptoms and posed low risk.
- The trial judge discredited Gunderson’s experts (especially Dr. Watson), credited Dr. Markos and denied both discharge and on-grounds passes; Gunderson moved for reconsideration and appealed.
- Gunderson argued section 5-2-4(g) of the Illinois Unified Code of Corrections (730 ILCS 5/5-2-4(g)) is unconstitutional because it places the burden on the petitioner to prove by clear and convincing evidence he no longer suffers from mental illness.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Constitutionality of 730 ILCS 5/5-2-4(g) burden allocation | State: statute constitutional; burden on petitioner appropriate to protect public and avoid relitigation of criminal trial | Gunderson: due process requires burden shift to State once petitioner makes prima facie showing he no longer has mental illness | Court: statute constitutional; follows Wattleton and Wolst balancing Mathews factors; burden remains on petitioner |
| Whether Gunderson made prima facie showing of no mental illness | State: treatment team did not recommend discharge; evidence mixed | Gunderson: several witnesses and experts said he no longer met schizophrenia criteria | Court: Gunderson did make a prima facie showing, so constitutional challenge must be addressed; nonetheless statute stands and denial affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Foucha v. Louisiana, 504 U.S. 71 (Supreme Court) (confinement of insanity acquittee requires present mental illness and dangerousness)
- Addington v. Texas, 441 U.S. 418 (Supreme Court) (clear-and-convincing standard in civil commitment cases)
- United States v. Wattleton, 296 F.3d 1184 (11th Cir.) (upholding burden on insanity acquittee to prove release by clear and convincing evidence under federal statute)
- People v. Wolst, 347 Ill. App. 3d 782 (Ill. App.) (upholding Illinois section 5-2-4(g) against due process challenge)
- Levine v. Torvik, 986 F.2d 1506 (6th Cir.) (diagnosis of illness in remission can be consistent with finding no current mental illness)