History
  • No items yet
midpage
People v. Tousignant
2014 IL 115329
| Ill. | 2014
Read the full case

Background

  • Mitchell Tousignant pleaded guilty to delivery/possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance; counts were merged and he was sentenced to 12 years' imprisonment.
  • Counsel filed a motion to reconsider the sentence (alleging excessiveness) and a Rule 604(d) certificate the same day stating counsel had consulted with defendant about contentions of error in the sentence (but not mentioning the plea).
  • The trial court denied the motion; defendant appealed.
  • The Fourth District reversed and remanded, holding counsel’s Rule 604(d) certificate did not strictly comply because it did not state counsel consulted about the guilty plea.
  • The Illinois Supreme Court granted leave, affirmed the appellate court, and held Rule 604(d)’s consultation language requires counsel to certify consultation about both sentence and guilty-plea contentions.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument (People) Defendant's Argument (Tousignant) Held
Whether Rule 604(d) requires counsel to certify consultation about contentions of error in the sentence, the guilty plea, or both "Or" is disjunctive: certificate need only cover the subject of the post-plea motion (here, the sentence) Certificate was insufficient because it did not show counsel consulted about possible plea-related defects The Court held "or" must be read as "and" in the consultation clause; counsel must certify consultation about both sentence and plea to effectuate Rule 604(d)'s purpose
Whether strict compliance was required here given counsel certified consultation about the sentence State: certification about sentence satisfied Rule 604(d) when only sentence is challenged Appellate court/defendant: certification limited to sentence could miss plea defects and fails Rule 604(d) Court agreed with appellate court: strict compliance lacking where certificate omitted consultation about plea
Proper interpretive approach to the word "or" in Rule 604(d) Literal, disjunctive meaning controls; don’t rewrite the rule Read "or" as "and" where necessary to effectuate rule’s purpose of surfacing plea defects before appeal Court applied precedent allowing "or"/<->"and" substitution to preserve rule’s intent, treating "or" as "and" in the consultation clause
Remedy when certificate fails strict compliance State: no remand necessary if no actual prejudice Defense/Appellate: remand for new post-plea process (new motion/hearing and proper certification) Court affirmed remand: reversal and remand for new post-plea opportunity and strict compliance with Rule 604(d)

Key Cases Cited

  • People v. Wilk, 124 Ill. 2d 93 (Ill. 1988) (explaining Rule 604(d)’s purpose to let trial court correct plea-related improprieties before appeal)
  • People v. Shirley, 181 Ill. 2d 359 (Ill. 1998) (noting certificate assures trial court counsel reviewed defendant’s claims and considered relevant bases for motion)
  • John P. Moriarty, Inc. v. Murphy, 387 Ill. 119 (Ill. 1944) (permitting "or" and "and" to be read interchangeably where literal reading thwarts legislative intent)
  • County of Du Page v. Illinois Labor Relations Board, 231 Ill. 2d 593 (Ill. 2008) (same principle on flexible interpretation of conjunctive/disjunctive words)
  • People v. Campbell, 224 Ill. 2d 80 (Ill. 2006) (rules interpreted like statutes; give effect to drafters’ intent)
  • People v. Marker, 233 Ill. 2d 158 (Ill. 2009) (plain-meaning rule; interpret in context)
  • People v. Baskerville, 2012 IL 111056 (Ill. 2012) (use plain and ordinary meaning; consider purpose)
  • Elementary School District 159 v. Schiller, 221 Ill. 2d 130 (Ill. 2006) ("or" generally disjunctive)
  • People v. Herron, 215 Ill. 2d 167 (Ill. 2005) (discussion of conjunctive/disjunctive meanings)
  • Parcel of Property Commonly Known as 1945 North 31st Street, Decatur, Macon County, Illinois, 217 Ill. 2d 481 (Ill. 2005) ("and" generally conjunctive)
  • People v. Clendenin, 238 Ill. 2d 302 (Ill. 2010) (distinguishing client decisions from counsel’s tactical decisions)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: People v. Tousignant
Court Name: Illinois Supreme Court
Date Published: Mar 31, 2014
Citation: 2014 IL 115329
Docket Number: 115329
Court Abbreviation: Ill.