People v. Jones, 2015 IL App (3d) 130053

Derrick Jones was convicted by a jury of aggravated robbery (Class 1 felony); State proceeded on that count only.
Before trial the court advised Jones his sentencing range might be 4–30 years based on a prior juvenile delinquency adjudication noted on a docket sheet; Jones denied having such priors but elected to proceed to trial.
No evidence of the juvenile adjudication was presented to the jury; sentencing relied in part on the presentence investigation report (PSI) listing a 2005 juvenile adjudication for multiple offenses including three counts of residential burglary.
The trial court found Jones extended-term eligible under 730 ILCS 5/5-5-3.2(b)(7) (prior juvenile adjudication for an act that would be Class 1 or X if committed by an adult within 10 years) and imposed 24 years (extended term).
On appeal Jones challenged only the sentencing: (1) that using the juvenile adjudication without jury finding or indictment notice violated Apprendi; and (2) that the court impermissibly relied on the PSI in violation of Shepard.
The appellate court addressed whether juvenile adjudications fall under Apprendi’s prior-conviction exception and whether a PSI is an acceptable source for sentencing factfinding.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a juvenile adjudication qualifies as a "prior conviction" under Apprendi’s exception so the State need not plead or submit it to a jury	The State: juvenile adjudication falls within Apprendi’s prior-conviction exception; no jury proof or charging allegation required	Jones: Apprendi requires any fact that increases the statutory maximum (other than a prior conviction) to be pleaded and proven to a jury; juvenile adjudications are not "prior convictions" and thus must be proven to a jury	Held: Juvenile adjudication that afforded required constitutional safeguards is sufficiently analogous to an adult conviction and falls under Apprendi’s prior-conviction exception; no Apprendi error.
Whether the trial court’s reliance on the PSI to establish the juvenile adjudication violated Shepard (i.e., whether the court impermissibly relied on out-of-record factual sources at sentencing)	The State: once the adjudication is a proper prior, the court may use reliable judicial records such as the PSI to find the fact of the prior	Jones: Shepard limits sources a sentencing court may consult (restricting use of police reports); relying on the PSI to establish a juvenile adjudication is improper	Held: PSI is an appropriate and reliable judicial source to determine the fact of a prior adjudication; use of the PSI did not violate Shepard.

Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (general rule requiring jury proof of any fact increasing the statutory maximum except the fact of a prior conviction)
Shepard v. United States, 544 U.S. 13 (limits sentencing inquiry to certain judicial records when determining character of a prior conviction)
Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (recognition of recidivism/ prior-conviction exception)
Jones v. United States, 526 U.S. 227 (distinction between elements and sentencing facts; discussion of prior-conviction exception)
McKeiver v. Pennsylvania, 403 U.S. 528 (No constitutional right to jury trial in juvenile adjudication)
People v. Taylor, 221 Ill. 2d 157 (Illinois case distinguishing statutory issues from Apprendi issue; did not decide Apprendi/juvenile-adjudication question)
United States v. Smalley, 294 F.3d 1030 (Eighth Circuit: juvenile adjudications fall within Apprendi exception)
Welch v. United States, 604 F.3d 408 (Seventh Circuit: juvenile adjudications are sufficiently reliable for prior-conviction exception)