People v. Moore, 2020 IL App (4th) 180132-U

Tory S. Moore was convicted of first-degree murder in 1999; jury found the felony-murder aggravating factor but declined the death penalty; Moore was sentenced to natural life imprisonment.
Moore’s conviction and sentence were affirmed on direct appeal. He subsequently filed a postconviction petition (2006) and an earlier section 2-1401 petition (2013); both were dismissed and those dismissals were affirmed on appeal.
On November 6, 2017, Moore filed a new section 2-1401 petition arguing his sentence was void under Apprendi v. New Jersey because the trial judge, not the jury, found the offense to be "exceptionally brutal or heinous."
The trial court sua sponte dismissed the 2017 petition on February 2, 2018, concluding it was untimely and the claim was barred by res judicata.
The Office of the State Appellate Defender (OSAD) was appointed on appeal and moved to withdraw, arguing no meritorious issues exist; Moore did not respond to OSAD’s motion.
The appellate court granted OSAD’s motion to withdraw and affirmed the trial court’s dismissal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was the trial court permitted to dismiss the 2-1401 petition sua sponte after 30 days?	The State: yes; once 30 days to answer expired the petition was ripe and the court could sua sponte dismiss (Vincent).	Moore: dismissal was improper (he challenged the dismissal on appeal).	Held: Yes; dismissal was proper because the petition was ripe for adjudication.
Does Moore’s Apprendi-based claim render his sentence "void" under section 2-1401(f), allowing a late challenge?	The State: no; the claim is barred by res judicata and, in any event, challenges a voidable (not void) judgment — thus untimely.	Moore: his sentence is void under Apprendi because the judge, not the jury, found the brutal/heinous factor.	Held: No; the claim was previously litigated or is barred by res judicata and challenges a voidable, not void, judgment, so the petition was untimely.
Was Moore’s Apprendi argument precluded by earlier appeals and petitions?	The State: yes; the same issue was raised and rejected in prior appeals/postconviction proceedings.	Moore: relitigated the same claim via section 2-1401.	Held: Yes; res judicata bars relitigation of the claim.

People v. Vincent, 226 Ill. 2d 1 (establishes that a 2-1401 petition is ripe for adjudication after 30 days and the court may act sua sponte)
People v. Laugharn, 233 Ill. 2d 318 (30-day answer period and ripeness for court action on 2-1401 petitions)
People v. Castleberry, 2015 IL 116916 (distinguishes void judgments from voidable judgments for 2-1401(f) purposes)
People v. Burrows, 172 Ill. 2d 169 (res judicata bars issues previously adjudicated in relation to 2-1401 relief)