2012 IL App (2d) 090719
Ill. App. Ct.2012Background
- Defendant Kenneth Heritsch was convicted after a stipulated bench trial of aggravated driving with a revoked license (DWLR) and uninsured vehicle operation.
- The State sought Class 2 felony treatment under 625 ILCS 5/6-303(d-5), alleging the revocation that supported the offense was for DUI under §11-501.
- Defendant’s driving abstract showed a 1991 revocation for using a car to commit a drug-related felony, and a 2001 revocation for DUI, with the license never reinstated.
- At sentencing, the State argued the 1991 revocation was for DUI via the abstract; Defendant contended the revocation remained for a non-DUI offense and that the 2001 DUI revocation had no effect because there was no license to revoke.
- Section 6-303(d-5) creates a Class 2 felony penalty enhancement for a 15th or subsequent DWLR when the revocation was for DUI or a similar offense.
- The appellate court reduced the aggravated DWLR to DWLR, affirmed the uninsured-vehicle conviction, and remanded for resentencing on both offenses.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the aggravated DWLR conviction was properly proven | People contends the DUI revocation (2001) triggered the enhancement. | Heritsch argues the 1991 non-DUI revocation cannot be used to support aggravation since the license was never reinstated and no DUI revocation existed at the time of the offense. | Conviction reduced to DWLR; aggravation not proven. |
| Whether the 6-303(d-5) enhancement requires the revocation to be for DUI at the time of the offense | State asserts 'the revocation' includes the DUI revocation current at offense time. | Heritsch maintains the original 1991 revocation for a drug offense is the triggering revocation, not the later DUI revocation. | Statute not satisfied; enhancement not applicable. |
| How multiple revocations affect applying 6-303(d-5) | State argues multiple revocations can support enhancement regardless of whether a new license was issued. | Heritsch asserts only the latest or DUI-based revocation should count, given the framework of revocation vs. license. | Court adopts view that multiple revocations can be considered; however, here the 1991 revocation did not become a DUI-based triggering event, so enhancement failed. |
| Whether the uninsured-vehicle conviction stood | State relies on DWLR of October 18, 2008, while de-emphasizing the license-issuance issue. | Defense does not challenge the uninsured-vehicle conviction; challenge only the aggravated-DWLR enhancement. | Operating an uninsured motor vehicle affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Turner, 64 Ill. 2d 183 (1976) (driving privileges restoration procedure and disclosure requirements)
- Suddoth, 52 Ill. App. 2d 355 (1964) (revocation remains until a new license is issued)
- Morrison, 149 Ill. App. 3d 282 (1986) (revocation remains in effect unless/until new license issued)
- Fielding v. Fielding, 733 P.2d 271 (Alaska Ct. App. 1987) (foreign revocation and nonresident driving compact context)
- Nunez, 236 Ill. 2d 488 (2010) (DWLR and aggravated DUI interplay; legislative intent to punish repeats)