People v. Johnson, 2015 IL App (3d) 140364

Tracy Eugene Johnson was convicted by a jury of burglary (offense date June 21, 2013) and sentenced to 30 years’ imprisonment; judgment credited 276 days of presentence custody.
The written judgment ordered defendant to “pay the costs of prosecution herein.”
The circuit clerk entered a monetary assessment totaling $409.02, itemized on a payment-status sheet to include several statutory assessments (e.g., court system fund, violent crime victims assistance, medical costs, youth diversion, drug court, and various clerical/add-on charges).
Defendant appealed and asked the appellate court to remand for the trial court to state and enter any statutorily mandated fines and to apply the $5-per-day presentence incarceration credit against eligible fines (725 ILCS 5/110-14).
The State argued no fines were ordered and that defendant’s challenge to the monetary assessment was forfeited; the payment-status sheet in the record, however, showed fines were included in the clerk’s $409.02 assessment.
The appellate court vacated the clerk-imposed $409.02 assessment and remanded with directions for the trial court to review, correct the financial component of the sentence, and apply the $5/day credit to eligible fines.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the clerk-imposed $409.02 assessment (containing statutory fines) is valid	The judgment only ordered "costs"; no indication trial court ordered fines, so assessment stands	Clerk cannot impose fines; included items are fines that must be imposed by the trial court and therefore the clerk’s assessment is void	The clerk-imposed $409.02 is vacated; fines must be imposed by the trial court and clerk cannot unilaterally levy fines
Whether defendant forfeited challenge to monetary assessment by not raising it in post-sentencing motion	Forfeiture applies because defendant did not contest the clerk’s $409.02 in the motion to reconsider	Challenges to void orders are not forfeitable and may be raised for the first time on appeal	Court held challenge to an allegedly void monetary order is not forfeited and may be raised on review
Whether defendant is entitled to $5-per-day presentence custody credit against eligible fines	Not argued in detail by State in this appeal	Defendant sought remand to apply the $5/day credit toward eligible fines	Court remanded and directed trial court to allow the $5-per-day presentence incarceration credit against eligible fines

People v. Marshall, 242 Ill. 2d 285 (void-order challenges are not forfeited)
People v. Graves, 235 Ill. 2d 244 (county-board-authorized assessments can be fines despite statutory labels)
People v. Jones, 223 Ill. 2d 569 (characterization of certain assessments and surcharge analyses)
People v. Lewis, 234 Ill. 2d 32 (sentencing-fine analysis)
People v. Johnson, 2011 Ill. 111817 (discussion of financial assessments/costs authority)
People v. Dalton, 406 Ill. App. 3d 158 (treatment of State’s Attorney costs and related assessments)