In so doing, they caused further contact between the truck and defendant's vehicle. Subsequently, the driver of the truck pled guilty to one count of reckless driving. Defendant was charged with two counts of reckless driving. After the State dropped one of the two counts against defendant, defendant proceeded to trial, and was convicted by a jury. The appellate court affirmed.
Defendant is correct.
Defendant has not been convicted of violating the Criminal Code. The trial court's order of restitution is therefore vacated. Defendant next argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion in limine which sought to bar the State from arguing to the jury that defendant could be found guilty of reckless driving if he acted either willfully or wantonly. The plain language of the statute, however, belies defendant's contention. The State thus was correct in arguing that defendant could be found guilty if he acted either willfully or wantonly.