People v. Shipp
2011 IL App (2d) 100197
Ill. App. Ct.2011Background
- In April 2007, officers executed a search at Shipp's home and found cocaine, cannabis, scales, and other items within 1,000 feet of a church.
- Shipp was initially charged by complaint with possession with intent to deliver under 407(b)(2) and additional offenses; information later charged the same offenses.
- At arraignment, the court noted a miswording between the charging document and the statute, and admonished Shipp as to a Class 1 felony, with no objection from counsel.
- Defense later raised concerns that the State would prove possession of more than 1 gram under 407(b)(2) based on outside-the-home cocaine, potentially confusing the jury if inside-the-home evidence was also admitted.
- The State proposed amending the information to conform with the body of the language, changing the citation from 407(b)(2) to 407(b)(1); defense argued this would require a new indictment.
- The trial court allowed the amendment, admonished Shipp on the Class X charge, granted a continuance, and the information was amended to cite 407(b)(1); Shipp was convicted of the Class X felony and sentenced to 22 years.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the amendment to the information a formal correction rather than a material change? | State contends amendment corrected a miswriting, not creating a new offense. | Shipp argues amendment is material, charging a different offense with different penalties. | Amendment was formal; no material change. |
| Did the amendment implicate speedy-trial rights and require discharge or affect counsel’s effectiveness? | State may proceed; no speedy-trial violation because amendment was formal. | Speedy-trial rights were implicated; counsel should have moved to discharge. | Speedy-trial rights not implicated; no ineffective assistance. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Williams, 94 Ill. App. 3d 241 (1981) (continuances not attributable to new charges when not before court; same facts)
- People v. Flores, 250 Ill. App. 3d 399 (1993) (formal amendment permissible when not material or prejudicial)
- People v. Betts, 78 Ill. App. 3d 200 (1979) (amendments changing penalty material when grand juries or charges altered)
- People v. Clark, 96 Ill. App. 3d 491 (1981) (amendment within indictment/information permitted if no prejudice)
- People v. Patterson, 267 Ill. App. 3d 933 (1994) (amendment of factual allegations can be material when it alters charge)
- People v. White, 2011 IL 109616 (2011) (sovereign discretion of State; plea/facts control sentencing; related pretrial implications)