Court Opinion

ID: 9521738
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 02:10:55.106224+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:50:33.855112
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE SIMON, specially concurring: I concur in the decision on the ground that the defendant was in custody for a different offense, not the one out of which this case arose, and for that reason he was not cloaked with the protection of the speedy trial act for more than 120 days before his trial commenced. I disagree with the court’s alternative position that minors do not commit “offenses” and can never be “in custody for an offense” until they are transferred to adult status. Common sense says that a person in custody for armed robbery is in custody for an offense, so as to start the speedy trial clock (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1979, ch. 38, par. 103—5(a)). “Offense” means a violation of any penal statute of this State. (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1979, ch. 38, par. 2—12.) In other words, a person is in custody for an offense if he is in custody for a violation of a penal statute. A delinquent minor is one who has violated or attempted to violate any Federal or State law or municipal ordinance. (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1979, ch. 37, par. 702—2.) While the definitions are not identical, the idea is the same. Essentially, a delinquent minor is one who commits an offense. The focus of both definitions is on the defendant’s conduct, not on how the legal system will respond. A minor in custody as delinquent is “in custody for an alleged offense” (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1979, ch. 38, par. 103—5(a)). The Juvenile Court Act declares the policy of this State to be that minors shall have the procedural rights of adults “unless specifically precluded by laws which enhance the protection of such minors.” (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1979, ch. 37, par. 701—2(3)(a).) The juvenile speedy trial provision is in fact more stringent than the adult rule: delinquents held in detention are to be tried within 10 judicial days, unless the State shows good cause for a 20-day extension (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1979, ch. 37, par. 704—2). Why, then, should a minor tried as an adult have less protection than a real adult? The court’s conclusion contravenes both the letter and the spirit of our statutes.