Opinion ID: 1980708
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: Admission of Residential Burglary Convictions

Text: Defendant argues that he was improperly prejudiced by the admission during aggravation of four convictions for residential burglary, all related to the instant case. In his 1988 bench trial, defendant was convicted of: (1) residential burglary with intent to commit theft, (2) residential burglary with intent to commit murder, (3) residential burglary with intent to commit aggravated criminal sexual assault, and (4) residential burglary with intent to commit armed robbery. At the sentencing hearing, the State, over defense objection, published to the jury all four convictions. Defendant argues that admission of all four convictions violated the one-act, one-crime rule, citing People v. King (1977), 66 Ill.2d 551, 6 Ill.Dec. 891, 363 N.E.2d 838. However, defendant may not now argue that he was improperly convicted of four counts of residential burglary because those convictions were affirmed in Simms I, 121 Ill.2d 259, 117 Ill.Dec. 147, 520 N.E.2d 308. See People v. Patterson (1992), 154 Ill.2d 414, 468, 182 Ill.Dec. 592, 610 N.E.2d 16 (under the law of the case doctrine, a rule established as controlling will continue to be the law of the case as long as the facts remain the same).