Court Opinion

ID: 9726167
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 12:35:28.987441+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:25:23.802344
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE HOPF, concurring in part and dissenting in part: I concur with the majority’s opinion finding no trial error. However, I dissent as to the majority’s upholding of the lower court’s imposition of a sentence of 60 years for attempted murder, to be served consecutively with his term of natural life imprisonment. I would modify the sentence, in accordance with our authority in Rule 615(b)(4) (87 Ill. 2d R. 615(b)(4)), to have the 60-year extended-term for attempted murder run concurrently with his sentence of natural life imprisonment. The propriety of a consecutive sentence pursuant to section 5 — 8— 4 of the Unified Code of Corrections (the Code) (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1983, ch. 38, par. 1005 — 8—4) to follow a sentence of natural life imprisonment under section 5 — 8—1(a)(1)(b) of the Code (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1983, ch. 38, par. 1005 — 8—1(a)(1)(b)) has never been specifically dealt with, and would constitute a question of first impression in Illinois. In People v. Wilson (1985), 138 Ill. App. 3d 513, 485 N.E.2d 1264, and People v. Bush (1981), 103 Ill. App. 3d 5, 430 N.E.2d 514, a sentence consecutive to a term of natural life was imposed. However, the inherent invalidity of such a sentence was never raised. Bush, though close to the case at bar, dealt with the question whether under the facts of that case the consecutive sentences were excessive, and, further, the question of the constitutionality of a natural life imprisonment sentence as it related to article I, section 11, of the Illinois Constitution (Ill. Const. 1970, art. I, sec. 11). The trial court, in sentencing the defendant, stated that the appellate court “under[stands] the Court’s feeling that this Defendant has forfeited his rights to walk around as a free man.” I have no quarrel with this position, but state that that is why we have a sentence of natural life imprisonment, section 5 — 8—1(a)(1)(b) of the Code. Ill. Rev. Stat. 1983, ch. 38, par. 1005 — 8— 1(a)(1)(b). Section 5 — 8—4(b) of the Code (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1983, ch. 38, par. 1005 — 8—4(b)) provides: “The court shall not impose a consecutive sentence unless, having regard to the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and character of the defendant, it is of the opinion that such a term is required to protect the public from further criminal conduct by the defendant, the basis for which the court shall set forth in the record.” The imposition of a sentence such as we have here flies in the face of the language of section 5 — 8—4(b) and serves no useful purpose. The defendant has no prospect of future release and consequently poses no future threat to society. A reasonable implication of legislative intent in the formulation of the statute would be that the defendant would have some possibility of inflicting further criminal conduct upon the public. I do not agree with the majority that we can speculate as to what future legislatures, courts or governors may do towards modifying life sentences, including this one. In addition, such a sentence would conflict with section 5 — 8— 4(c)(2) of the Code (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1983, ch. 38, par. 1005 — 8—4(c)(2)), which prescribes that “the aggregate of consecutive sentences [the defendant could receive in this case] shall not exceed the sum of the maximum terms authorized under Section 5 — 8—2 for the 2 most serious felonies involved.” (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1983, ch. 38, par. 1005 — 8—4(c)(2).) By so sentencing, the court could be violating this statute by a sentence that exceeds the sum of the aggregate maximum extended terms set forth in section 5 — 8—2 of the Code (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1983, ch. 38, par. 1005 — 8—2). The trial judge in pronouncing defendant’s sentences stated: “I recognize the public might say why can you have a consecutive term to a life term.” This recognizes that there is a certain incongruity to such type of sentencing and an incongruity that does not enhance respect for the system. I would modify.