People v. McChriston
2014 IL 115310
| Ill. | 2014Background
- In 2004, McChriston was convicted of unlawful delivery of a controlled substance, a Class 1 felony with a mandatory Class X sentence of 25 years.
- At sentencing, the MSR term under 730 ILCS 5/5-8-1(d) was not written into the sentencing order nor mentioned at the hearing.
- The MSR term was three years and was required to be included by operation of law under the 2004 statute.
- The DOC later enforced the MSR term, leading McChriston to file a 2-1401 petition; the circuit court dismissed and the appellate court affirmed.
- The Illinois Supreme Court held that MSR attached automatically by operation of law under the then-existing statute, not added by the DOC, and rejected the separation of powers and due process challenges.
- The 2011 amendment changed the statutory language to require MSR to be written in the sentencing order; the court concluded this clarified the law rather than creating a new result for McChriston.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether MSR attaches by operation of law regardless of sentencing order | McChriston argues MSR was added by the DOC, violating separation of powers. | State argues MSR was included by operation of law as part of the sentence. | MSR attached automatically; no separation-of-powers violation. |
| Whether DOC enforcement of MSR after the sentence increases the sentence | McChriston contends the DOC’s action impermissibly increases the sentence beyond the order. | State maintains the MSR term is within the sentence by operation of law. | MSR enforcement did not increase the sentence; it was automatic under the statute. |
| Constitutional due process challenge to MSR in the absence of a written order | McChriston asserts due process rights are violated when the MSR term is not in the written order. | State argues no due process violation given MSR attached by operation of law. | Due process challenge rejected; MSR attached automatically and not an unlawful increase. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Scott, 66 Ill. 2d 190 (1977) (parole/mandatory release power validated by statute)
- People v. Williams, 66 Ill. 2d 179 (1977) (legislature power to fix punishment and enforcement through parole)
- Hill v. United States ex rel. Wampler, 298 U.S. 460 (1936) (judgment governs sentence; clerk cannot alter penalties not in sentence)
- Earley v. Murray, 451 F.3d 71 (2d Cir. 2006) (judgment-based sentence cannot be increased by administrator without court)
- People v. Evans, 2013 IL 113471 (2013) (Illinois Supreme Court addressed Earley and 5-8-1(d) in MSR context)