Title: People v. Robinson

State: illinois

Issuer: Illinois Supreme Court

Document:

Docket No. 86110-Agenda 25-May 1999.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Appellee, v. WILL ROBINSON et al., Appellants.
Opinion filed September 23, 1999.
JUSTICE HEIPLE delivered the opinion of the court:
In these consolidated appeals, defendants died while the direct appeals of their criminal convictions were pending before the
appellate court. The appellate court dismissed the appeals but declined to void the defendants' convictions (298 Ill. App. 3d
866) entered in the circuit court of Cook County. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and reaffirm the rule this court
established in People v. Mazzone, 74 Ill. 2d 44 (1978), that when a defendant dies while his direct appeal is pending, the
appeal must be dismissed and his conviction must be abated ab initio.
FACTS
Defendant John Dunn was convicted of voluntary manslaughter and sentenced to 24 years in prison. Defendant Amanda
Wallace was convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to natural life in prison. Defendant Glennon Dye was convicted
of aggravated criminal sexual assault and sentenced to 30 years in prison. Each defendant died while his or her direct appeal
was pending in the appellate court; defendants Wallace and Dye committed suicide and defendant Dunn died of cancer.
Counsel representing defendants filed separate motions in the appellate court to dismiss defendants' appeals and vacate
their convictions. The appellate court consolidated the individual motions and dismissed defendants' appeals, but refused to
vacate their convictions. The appellate court held that the enactment of the Crime Victim's Rights Amendment to the
Illinois Constitution (Ill. Const. 1970, art. I, §8.1 (eff. November 3, 1992)) required the court to consider the rights of the
victims when deciding whether defendants' convictions should be abated ab initio. The appellate court held that it would
not abate defendants' convictions because abatement would have a "senselessly harsh impact on the psychological well-being" of crime victims and their families by implying that defendants have somehow been exonerated.
This court granted the petition for leave to appeal filed by counsel representing defendants. 177 Ill. 2d R. 315(a).
ANALYSIS
In People v. Mazzone, 74 Ill. 2d 44 (1978), this court held that when a defendant dies while his direct appeal is pending
before the appellate court, all of the criminal proceedings abate ab initio, from their inception. The rule adopted by this
court in Mazzone recognizes that the purpose of criminal prosecutions is to punish the defendant; continuing criminal
proceedings when the defendant is dead is a useless act. Mazzone, 74 Ill. 2d  at 46. The State argues that Mazzone was
wrongly decided and should be overruled based on the changes in the law contained in the Crime Victim's Rights
Amendment.
The Crime Victim's Rights Amendment provides crime victims with a set of 10 distinct rights in criminal prosecutions. The
State points specifically to two of these freshly minted constitutional rights of victims: the right to "be treated with fairness
and respect for their dignity and privacy throughout the criminal justice process" (Ill. Const. 1970, art. I, §8.1(a)(1)), and the
right to restitution (Ill. Const. 1970, art. I, §8.1(a)(10)). Unfortunately for the State's argument, the Crime Victim's Rights
Amendment has neither application nor reference to the abatement of criminal prosecutions. That is to say, it is wholly
irrelevant to the issue at hand.(1) 
This court has acknowledged that compelling reasons may require a departure from prior precedent, but it has also
recognized that it will not depart from precedent "merely because the court is of the opinion that it might decide otherwise
were the question a new one." Maki v. Frelk, 40 Ill. 2d 193, 196-97 (1968), citing Prall v. Burckhartt, 299 Ill. 19 (1921).
The rule established in Mazzone that a defendant's conviction abates ab initio if defendant dies while his direct appeal is
pending has been the law in Illinois for over twenty years and "should be deemed controlling until and unless the General
Assembly provides otherwise." Kinsey Distilling Sales Co. v. Foremost Liquors Stores, Inc., 15 Ill. 2d 182, 188 (1958).
CONCLUSION
For the reasons stated above, the judgments of the appellate and circuit courts are vacated.
Judgments vacated.
1.      1The statute enacted by the General Assembly to enforce the Crime Victim's Rights Amendment (725 ILCS 120/1
et seq. (West 1996)) is also irrelevant to the matter of abatement of criminal prosecutions.