Opinion ID: 2086451
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Claims Relating to the Proportionality of the Sentence

Text: Defendant next contends that the death sentence imposed upon him is grossly disproportionate to the prison sentences of 25 and 7 years imposed upon Ann and Wayne Walters, respectively, and is grossly proportionate to the death sentence imposed upon Bean. This contention is without merit. Codefendant Bean attempted to raise an identical argument in his second appeal to this court. ( People v. Bean (1990), 137 Ill.2d 65, 147 Ill.Dec. 891, 560 N.E.2d 258.) Ann Walters pleaded guilty to first degree murder and received a sentence of imprisonment of 25 years. (See Bean, 137 Ill.2d at 136, 147 Ill.Dec. 891, 560 N.E.2d 258.) Wayne Walters negotiated with the prosecution and pleaded guilty to conspiracy, for which he received a seven-year sentence. See Bean, 137 Ill.2d at 136, 147 Ill.Dec. 891, 560 N.E.2d 258. Defendant was more culpable than Ann Walters and Wayne Walters. We are mindful that defendant had the final opportunity to show some mercy towards Dorothy Polulach. He chose not to do so, and deliberately returned to the car to retrieve the gun which was subsequently used to kill her. Further, the proportionality of the defendant's and Bean's sentences persuades us that defendant's sentence was neither arbitrary nor capricious. Defendant also makes much of the fact that Bean's participation in the murder scheme was greater than his participation. Bean, of course, was also sentenced to death. Whether Bean's actions were arguably slightly more reprehensible than defendant's does not render defendant himself ineligible for the death penalty.