Opinion ID: 2229911
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Pretrial Dismissal

Text: The State first argues that the circuit court erred on procedural grounds. The State contends that the circuit court erred in dismissing the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act charge prior to trial because such a ruling is premature and invades prosecutorial discretion concerning what offenses to charge. This court rejected these exact challenges in People v. Lewis, 175 Ill.2d 412, 423, 222 Ill.Dec. 296, 677 N.E.2d 830 (1996). In Lewis, this court observed that proportionate penalty challenges are routinely considered in a pretrial posture. See, e.g., People v. Bailey, 167 Ill.2d 210, 234-37, 212 Ill.Dec. 608, 657 N.E.2d 953 (1995); People v. Farmer, 165 Ill.2d 194, 209-10, 209 Ill.Dec. 33, 650 N.E.2d 1006 (1995); People v. Johns, 153 Ill.2d 436, 447-49, 180 Ill.Dec. 254, 607 N.E.2d 148 (1992); People v. Hamm, 149 Ill.2d 201, 218-20, 172 Ill.Dec. 179, 595 N.E.2d 540 (1992); People v. Simmons, 145 Ill.2d 264, 269-72, 164 Ill.Dec. 568, 583 N.E.2d 484 (1991). Relying on People v. Christy, 139 Ill.2d 172, 151 Ill.Dec. 315, 564 N.E.2d 770 (1990), this court in Lewis also rejected the contention that such a pretrial dismissal improperly usurps prosecutorial discretion. Lewis, 175 Ill.2d at 417, 222 Ill.Dec. 296, 677 N.E.2d 830. The court reasoned that where the penalty for a given offense violates the proportionate penalties clause, the prosecutor has no discretion to charge that offense. Lewis, 175 Ill.2d at 422, 222 Ill.Dec. 296, 677 N.E.2d 830. Thus, we address the merits of the proportionate penalties issue.