People v. Hammond
355 Ill. Dec. 1
Ill.2011Background
- This is a consolidated Illinois Supreme Court decision addressing probation sanctions and whether probation officers may file violations of probation (VOP) petitions.
- Alberty argues that a probation officer lacks authority to file a petition seeking revocation of probation in Cook County.
- Hammond, Gaither, and Donahue involve Livingston County cases where petitions to revoke probation were filed under section 5-6-4(i) and the Eleventh Judicial Circuit’s Administrative Sanctions Program (ASP).
- The State contends that section 5-6-4(i) violates separation of powers by restricting the State's Attorney's prosecutorial prerogative and allowing probation officers to offer intermediate sanctions.
- Appellate courts previously held that probation officers could file VOP petitions and that the ASP did not infringe separation of powers; the Illinois Supreme Court reviews these holdings.
- The court ultimately affirms the appellate rulings, holding that probation officers may file violations of probation and that 5-6-4(i) does not grant the State’s Attorney a veto over intermediate sanctions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a probation officer has authority to file a VOP petition | Alberty argues officers lack authority | State contends authority is proper under 5-6-4(i) and related statutes | Probation officers have authority to file VOP petitions |
| Whether 5-6-4(i) unconstitutionally vests veto power in the State's Attorney | Alberty/State contends a veto exists | State contends no veto; discretion remains with judiciary | 5-6-4(i) does not give veto power to the State's Attorney |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Phillips, 66 Ill.2d 412 (1977) (probation authority and treatment without intruding on judicial sentencing power)
- County of Kane v. Carlson, 116 Ill.2d 186 (1987) (overlaps among branches; separation of powers not a total divorce)
- People v. Walker, 119 Ill.2d 465 (1988) (separation of powers and overlapping governmental powers)
- In re T. W., 101 Ill.2d 438 (1984) (judicial roles in probation and related procedures)
- People v. Pankey, 94 Ill.2d 12 (1983) (prosecutorial discretion and executive functions in charging)
- Phillips v. Phillips, 66 Ill.2d 412 (1977) (probation and treatment distinctions within separation of powers)