People v. Lake
2014 IL App (1st) 131542
Ill. App. Ct.2015Background
- In 1996 Lake was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to 45 years; conviction affirmed on direct appeal.
- In January 2013 Lake filed a pro se 735 ILCS 5/2-1401 petition arguing his sentence was void because he was not admonished that a three-year mandatory supervised release (MSR) would apply and that DOC improperly added the MSR, violating due process.
- The petition was docketed Jan 29, 2013; an assistant State’s Attorney was present in court when the petition was noted on the record Feb 22, 2013; the court continued dates and then denied the petition in a written order on April 4, 2013 after considering the merits.
- Lake appealed, arguing (1) the addition of the three-year MSR violated due process and separation of powers and (2) the sua sponte dismissal was premature because the State was not properly served under Supreme Court Rule 105(b).
- The trial court relied on the Illinois Supreme Court’s ruling in People v. McChriston to hold MSR attaches as a matter of law and is not added by DOC, and applied appellate precedent (this court’s Ocon) that actual notice to the State in open court sufficed so dismissal after 30 days was proper.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity/imposition of 3‑year MSR | MSR is part of sentence by operation of law; trial court need not separately impose it (People) | MSR was improperly added by DOC; lack of admonition denied due process and separation of powers | Court: Affirmed McChriston — MSR attaches automatically and DOC did not unlawfully add it; claim fails |
| Service and premature sua sponte dismissal of 2‑1401 petition | State had actual notice (ASA present in court) and chose not to answer; Vincent allows sua sponte dismissal after 30 days | Lake: Service by regular mail was improper under Rule 105(b); thus 30‑day response period never began and dismissal was premature | Court: State had actual notice in open court; petition was ripe after 30 days and dismissal was proper; Lake lacks standing to complain of defective service on behalf of State |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. McChriston, 2014 IL 115310 (Illinois Supreme Court) (MSR term attaches automatically as part of sentence)
- People v. Vincent, 226 Ill. 2d 1 (Illinois Supreme Court) (trial court may act on 2‑1401 petition notwithstanding lack of responsive pleading; sua sponte dismissal allowed once petition is ripe)
- People v. Laugharn, 233 Ill. 2d 318 (Illinois Supreme Court) (sua sponte dismissal before expiration of 30‑day response period is premature)
- People v. Pinkonsly, 207 Ill. 2d 555 (Illinois Supreme Court) (elements and scope of 2‑1401 relief)
- Sarkissian v. Chicago Board of Education, 201 Ill. 2d 95 (Illinois Supreme Court) (voidness grounds for 2‑1401 not subject to two‑year limit)
- People v. Artis, 232 Ill. 2d 156 (Illinois Supreme Court) (appellate courts bound by Supreme Court precedent)