People v. Riley, 984 N.E.2d 128

Defendant DeJuan Riley was convicted of possession of cannabis after a bench trial.
Sentencing included two years’ imprisonment and nearly $1,200 in fines and fees, with some credits applied.
At sentencing, Riley sought a $5-per-day credit for 210 days of home confinement plus 50 days in jail pre-sentencing.
The court awarded 100 days’ credit (50 jail days doubled) and allowed a separate credit for electronic monitoring.
The court also imposed a $200 DNA analysis fee under section 5-4-3 and applied a $500 monetary credit under section 110-14 for 100 days of presentence custody.
On appeal, Riley challenged (1) the per diem credit for home confinement and (2) the DNA analysis fee; the appellate court vacated in part and remanded.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Per diem credit applicability for home confinement days	Riley seeks $5/day credit for all 210 days of home confinement.	Riley argues credit should cover all pre-sentence confinement days.	Per diem credit limited to days actually incarcerated; remand to recalc credit.
DNA analysis fee validity when DNA already in database	DNA fee should apply regardless of prior DNA collection.	DNA analysis fee should be vacated when DNA already collected.	DNA analysis fee vacated on remand.

People v. Hare, 119 Ill. 2d 441 (Ill. 1988) (established per diem credit for incarceration against fines)
People v. Robinson, 391 Ill. App. 3d 822 (Ill. App. 2009) (discussed scope of credits against fines)
Kuhns, 372 Ill. App. 3d 829 (Ill. App. 2007) (dissent on interpretation of 'incarceration' vs. 'custody' for 110-14 credit)
Beachem v. People, 229 Ill. 2d 237 (Ill. 2008) (clarified custody vs. incarceration; supports narrower 110-14 credit)
People v. Caballero, 228 Ill. 2d 79 (Ill. 2008) (related to sentencing credits and 5-4.5-100(b))
People v. Marshall, 242 Ill. 2d 285 (Ill. 2011) (DNA fee appellate consideration; supports vacatur)