People v. Zendejas
2017 IL App (2d) 160565
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2017Background
- Ruben Zendejas pleaded guilty to aggravated driving under the influence and was sentenced to 10 years’ incarceration on May 27, 2016.
- Zendejas filed a motion to reconsider his sentence within 30 days and counsel submitted an amended Rule 604(d) certificate on June 24, 2016.
- The certificate stated counsel had consulted with defendant “by mail or in person” about his plea and sentence, and that counsel had examined the trial court file and the report of proceedings of the plea.
- The State argued the certificate failed to strictly comply with Illinois Supreme Court Rule 604(d) as amended, and thus a remand for a proper certificate and opportunity to file a new postjudgment motion was required.
- The appellate court reviewed de novo whether the certificate met the strict requirements of Rule 604(d) and whether the State could raise the issue.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Zendejas) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Rule 604(d) certificate strictly complied with the amended rule | Certificate was defective because it used “or” instead of the required “and,” and failed to state counsel reviewed the report of proceedings for the sentencing hearing | Certificate was adequate; no defect preventing appeal on merits | Certificate was defective; did not strictly comply (must state consultation about both plea and sentence and review of sentencing hearing transcript) — remand required |
| Whether the State has standing to challenge a deficient Rule 604(d) certificate | The State may raise the certificate’s adequacy; the certificate benefits the courts and cannot be waived by defendant | The State lacks standing because the rule protects defendants | State has standing; Rule 604(d) is for the benefit of the trial and appellate courts and is not a personal right that can be waived |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Prather, 379 Ill. App. 3d 763 (appellate review is de novo)
- People v. Janes, 158 Ill. 2d 27 (Rule 604(d) requires strict compliance)
- People v. Lindsay, 239 Ill. 2d 522 (remand required when certificate noncompliant to allow filing of proper certificate and new motion)
- People v. Munetsi, 283 Ill. App. 3d 326 (Rule 604(d) certificate primarily benefits the courts and is not a personal right; cannot be waived)
- People v. Fitzgibbon, 184 Ill. 2d 320 (discussed in relation to Munetsi)
- People v. Youngbey, 82 Ill. 2d 556 (presentence report is for the court’s benefit and not a personal right)