Opinion ID: 2074649
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Respondent's Motion to Strike

Text: Initially, we address respondent's motion to strike, which was taken with the case. In his motion, respondent argues that portions of the statement of facts included in the State's appellate brief should be stricken because they fail to comply with Supreme Court Rule 341(e)(6) (188 Ill.2d R. 341(e)(6)). Rule 341(e)(6) provides that the statement of facts in the appellant's brief shall contain the facts necessary to an understanding of the case, stated accurately and fairly without argument or comment. 188 Ill.2d R. 341(e)(6). Respondent contends that portions of the statement of facts included in the State's brief are: (1) irrelevant and unfairly prejudicial; (2) unsupported by the record or based on portions of the record that may not have been introduced into evidence; (3) argumentative; and/or (4) improperly phrased. [T]he striking of an appellate brief, in whole or in part, is a harsh sanction and is appropriate only when the alleged violations of procedural rules interfere with or preclude review. Moomaw v. Mentor H/S, Inc., 313 Ill.App.3d 1031, 1035, 247 Ill.Dec. 43, 731 N.E.2d 816 (2000); accord People v. Flanagan, 201 Ill.App.3d 1071, 1075, 147 Ill.Dec. 765, 559 N.E.2d 1105 (1990). In the case at bar, the statement of facts included in the State's brief substantially complies with Rule 341(e)(6), and it neither hinders nor precludes our review. Respondent's motion to strike is therefore denied.