In Wilk , the supreme court held that a defendant wishing only to challenge his sentence on appeal need not file a motion to withdraw his guilty plea. Instead, if a defendant is complaining only about his sentence, it is sufficient that he file a motion attacking only the sentence prior to appeal. The State points out that failure to advise a defendant of the right to an appeal is not a denial of due process or of equal protection. However, in this case, the trial court went further than failing to advise the defendant of his right to appeal. The trial court wrongly advised the defendant that in order to exercise his right to an appeal, he would have to risk the reinstatement of the dismissed charges, when, in fact, he could have moved for reconsideration of his sentence without a detrimental impact on his guilty plea.
Some judicial history is necessary.
Jogi had entered into a partially negotiated plea pursuant to which the State agreed to request a particular sentencing range. The trial court imposed a sentence falling within the recommended range. Jogi failed to move to withdraw his guilty plea but, instead, filed a motion to reconsider his sentence. The reconsideration motion was denied, and Jogi challenged the propriety of his sentence on review. Relying on Evans , the Fourth District did not reach the merits of Jogi's appeal because he had not moved to withdraw his plea of guilty prior to filing an appeal.