Opinion ID: 2060035
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Jesse Holborow

Text: Holborow entered a plea of guilty to home invasion with great bodily harm to the victim, theft, and criminal trespass to a vehicle. The State's evidence showed that Holborow and two codefendants unlawfully entered the home of the victim, 70-year-old Bernard Harris, and proceeded to beat him and stab him before taking his beer and his van without permission. As a result of this attack, the victim became wheelchair bound and cognitively deficient and was no longer able to care for himself. At the commencement of the plea hearing, the trial court stated: Mr. Holborow, I have a written plea agreement before me indicating that you don't want a jury trial. It indicates you are going to plead guilty to seven counts against you. And you are going to receive on Count 1, home invasion, a 16-year-sentence.    There would be a finding of great bodily harm to the victim, meaning that you would have to serve 85 percent of your sentence.    Sixteen times 85 percent is 13.6 years. So that is what you are going to have to serve. You will get credit for whatever time you have been in jail. Now, there would be some court costs to pay. $200 DNA fee. There would be restitution of $5,643.59.    And you have to make yourself available and provide truthful testimony in the case of each co-defendant.    Is that what you want to do, Mr. Holborow? Defendant responded, Yes. The trial court continued: Now, it is important that you understand with respect to Count 1, the home invasion, that is a Class X felony. And the law says that if this were handled by other than a plea agreement, you could get anywhere from six to 30 years in prison, plus three years mandatory supervised release. You are not eligible for probation, periodic imprisonment, or conditional discharge. If you were found guilty, you would have to get a minimum of six years, and you could get as much as 30. And with great bodily harm, you have to serve 85 percent of your time. So do you understand what the possibilities there are, if this were handled by other than a plea agreement? Holborow confirmed that he understood, and the trial court continued: Now, Count 2, aggravated battery of a senior citizen;    Count 2 is a Class 2 felony.    That is the one where you are charged with knowingly causing great bodily harm to Bernard Harris, in that he was a senior citizen, an individual 60 years of age or older.    And you are eligible there for an extended term. Since that is a Class 2, an extended term is seven to fourteen years. So if this were handled by other than a plea agreement, the law provides you could get anywhere from three to 14 years in prison, plus two years mandatory supervised release. Other possibilities include probation or conditional discharge not to exceed four years, periodic imprisonment of 18 to 30 months. And you could be fined up to $25,000. So those are the possibilities there. Do you have any question about that, Mr. Holborow? Defendant had no questions. The court then stated: Now,    Count 3, 4, Count 5, are aggravated battery counts. Those are Class 3 felonies. You are eligible for an extended prison term of up to ten years there. So if this were handled by other than a plea agreement as to those three counts, you could get anywhere from two to ten years in prison, plus two years mandatory supervised release. Addressing the next count, the court stated, Count 6 is a theft count as a subsequent offense. That is a Class 4 felony. And there, you could get prison of anywhere from one to three years, plus one year mandatory supervised release. The court then described the potential penalties attached to the remaining misdemeanor count. Before accepting Holborow's plea, the trial court reiterated the plea agreement, but made no mention of MSR. The trial court also failed to mention MSR in sentencing Holborow, and the MSR term was not included in the written sentencing order. Holborow did not seek to withdraw his plea and did not file a direct appeal. Holborow did file a postconviction petition alleging that his constitutional rights were substantially violated when he received a more onerous sentence than he bargained for in accepting the plea agreement. Holborow contended that he was never advised that he would be required to serve a 3-year term of MSR in addition to the 16-year sentence he agreed to as part of his plea bargain. The trial court summarily dismissed Holborow's petition, finding that his claim was refuted by the record. The appellate court affirmed, finding that the trial court mentioned MSR to Holborow four different times during the plea hearing. Holborow, 382 Ill.App.3d at 861, 322 Ill.Dec. 754, 892 N.E.2d 1. The appellate court acknowledged that the admonishments could have been clearer, but nevertheless concluded that the admonishments were sufficient to make Holborow aware of the MSR requirement. Holborow, 382 Ill.App.3d at 865, 322 Ill.Dec. 754, 892 N.E.2d 1. Holborow now appeals.