People v. Rademacher
2016 IL App (3d) 130881
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2016Background
- Rademacher pled guilty to predatory criminal sexual assault of a child and criminal sexual assault in exchange for an aggregate sentencing cap of 12–35 years; the trial court accepted the plea and later imposed consecutive sentences totaling 30 years.
- Victim testimony/factual basis and defendant’s PSI admission established sexual activity with two underage boys occurring while defendant served as a youth minister and in the church parsonage; child pornography photos were also referenced as downloaded onto a church computer.
- At sentencing the court referenced religion and the church repeatedly, characterized defendant’s conduct as a betrayal of the church, and noted the offenses occurred on church property; defense presented clergy and psychiatric mitigation testimony and defendant gave a religiously themed allocution.
- Defendant filed a pro se postconviction petition alleging (1) the trial court improperly considered an aggravating factor (offense in a place of worship or on its grounds), (2) the court exhibited personal/religious bias at sentencing, and (3) appellate counsel was ineffective for moving to dismiss his direct appeal.
- The trial court dismissed the postconviction petition at the first stage; the appellate court reviewed de novo and affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Improper aggravating factor (place of worship/grounds) | State: sentencing factors were properly considered given facts and statutory language | Rademacher: offenses occurred in parsonage (not primary worship place); subsection (a)(11) inapplicable and constitutionally implicated | Court: even if statutory error, claim is statutory (not constitutional) and thus not cognizable on first-stage postconviction review; record rebuts any prejudice |
| Judicial/religious bias at sentencing | State: court’s remarks reflected reaction to facts, not personal animus; religion references invited by mitigation and facts | Rademacher: judge’s repeated religious invocations and harsh rhetoric showed animosity depriving him of due process | Court: comments did not show animosity/ill will; were invited and factually grounded; no due-process violation shown |
| Ineffective assistance of appellate counsel | State: counsel’s Rule 604(d) motion was proper and dismissal correct | Rademacher: counsel’s motion forfeited review of the substantive sentencing/bias claims and was deficient | Court: no arguable prejudice because underlying claims lacked constitutional merit; motion was consistent with Rule 604(d)/Linder and appellate waiver would likely have barred review anyway |
Key Cases Cited
- Bracy v. Gramley, 520 U.S. 899 (judicial bias at sentencing can violate due process)
- Zant v. Stephens, 462 U.S. 862 (religion as a factor in sentencing can render proceeding unfair)
- Linder v. People, 186 Ill. 2d 67 (requirement to move to withdraw plea before appealing sentence in partially negotiated pleas)
- Evans v. People, 174 Ill. 2d 320 (Rule 604(d) requires withdrawal motion in fully negotiated pleas)
- Hodges v. People, 234 Ill. 2d 1 (first-stage postconviction pleading standard is liberal; "gist" of constitutional claim required)
- Coleman v. People, 183 Ill. 2d 366 (court may take well-pled facts as true at first stage)
- Jones v. People, 211 Ill. 2d 140 (overview of Post-Conviction Hearing Act stages)
- Sluder v. People, 40 Ill. 2d 559 (sentences within statutory limits typically not constitutional issues)
- Del Vecchio v. People, 129 Ill. 2d 265 (statutory construction issues not cognizable as constitutional claims on postconviction)
- Boyd v. People, 347 Ill. App. 3d 321 (excessive sentence within statutory limits does not necessarily raise constitutional issue)