Court Opinion

ID: 9644802
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 21:05:18.72467+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:07:39.913293
License: Public Domain

NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and is not precedent except in the
     limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1).

                                       2023 IL App (3d) 220401-U

                                  Order filed August 22, 2023
      ____________________________________________________________________________

                                                 IN THE

                                    APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS

                                            THIRD DISTRICT

                                                   2023

      THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF                     )       Appeal from the Circuit Court
      ILLINOIS,                                      )       of the 13th Judicial Circuit,
                                                     )       La Salle County, Illinois,
             Plaintiff-Appellee,                     )
                                                     )       Appeal No. 3-22-0401
             v.                                      )       Circuit No. 21-CF-321
                                                     )
      JERRAD T. WHITEHURST,                          )       Honorable
                                                     )       Cynthia M. Raccuglia,
             Defendant-Appellant.                    )       Judge, Presiding.
      ____________________________________________________________________________

            JUSTICE ALBRECHT delivered the judgment of the court.
            Presiding Justice Holdridge and Justice Brennan concurred in the judgment.
      ____________________________________________________________________________

                                                ORDER

¶1          Held: The circuit court’s postplea admonishments did not substantially comply with
                  Illinois Supreme Court Rule 605(c).

¶2          Defendant, Jerrad T. Whitehurst, pled guilty to aggravated criminal sexual abuse and was

     sentenced to three years’ imprisonment. On appeal, defendant argues the La Salle County circuit

     court erred by failing to properly admonish him regarding the requirements for filing postplea

     motions in accordance with Illinois Supreme Court Rule 605(c). We remand for further

     proceedings.
¶3                                            I. BACKGROUND

¶4          Defendant was charged by superseding indictment with aggravated criminal sexual abuse

     (720 ILCS 5/11-1.60(c)(1)(i) (West 2018)). Defendant entered a negotiated plea of guilty in

     exchange for a sentencing cap of five years’ imprisonment. Defendant subsequently received three

     years’ imprisonment. After imposing defendant’s sentence, the court admonished defendant as

     follows:

                    “This is a final and appealable order, but in order to appeal, you need to file a

                    motion to vacate your guilty plea in this court 30 days from today’s date or you

                    waive any further appeal rights.

                            If you just want to appeal your sentence, then I—you need to do a motion—

                    well, you can’t. You just have to vacate the guilty plea because there was a cap that

                    was done in this case.”

     Defendant filed a pro se notice of appeal within 30 days of sentencing.

¶5                                             II. ANALYSIS

¶6          Defendant argues on appeal that he failed to file a motion to withdraw his guilty plea in

     compliance with Rule 604(d) prior to taking this appeal because the circuit court did not adequately

     admonish him regarding this requirement pursuant to Rule 605(c). See Ill. S. Ct. R. 604(d) (eff.

     July 1, 2017); Ill. S. Ct. R. 605(c) (eff. Oct. 1, 2001). Defendant asserts that because the court

     erred, his appeal should not be dismissed and requests we remand with the opportunity to file new

     postplea motions. Compliance with Rule 604(d) is a condition precedent to an appeal of a plea of

     guilty and dismissal is proper when this condition is not met. People v. Wilk, 124 Ill. 2d 93, 107

     (1988). Under the admonishment exception to this rule, the cause is remanded rather than

     dismissed “[i]f the trial court fails to give the admonishments set forth in Rule 605 and the

                                                       2
     defendant subsequently attempts to appeal without first filing the motions required by Rule

     604(d).” People v. Flowers, 208 Ill. 2d 291, 301 (2003).

¶7          When imposing a sentence for a negotiated guilty plea, Rule 605(c) requires the circuit

     court to advise the defendant:

                             “(1) that the defendant has a right to appeal;

                             (2) that prior to taking an appeal the defendant must file in the trial court,

                    within 30 days of the date on which sentence is imposed, a written motion asking

                    to have the judgment vacated and for leave to withdraw the plea of guilty, setting

                    forth the grounds for the motion;

                             (3) that if the motion is allowed, the plea of guilty, sentence and judgment

                    will be vacated and a trial date will be set on the charges to which the plea of guilty

                    was made;

                             (4) that upon the request of the State any charges that may have been

                    dismissed as a part of a plea agreement will be reinstated and will also be set for

                    trial;

                             (5) that if the defendant is indigent, a copy of the transcript of the

                    proceedings at the time of the defendant’s plea of guilty and sentence will be

                    provided without cost to the defendant and counsel will be appointed to assist the

                    defendant with the preparation of the motions; and

                             (6) that in any appeal taken from the judgment on the plea of guilty any

                    issue or claim of error not raised in the motion to vacate the judgment and to

                    withdraw the plea of guilty shall be deemed waived.” Ill. S. Ct. R. 605(c) (eff. Oct.

                    1, 2001).

                                                        3
     While it is mandatory that circuit courts admonish defendants pursuant to Rule 605(c), a strict

     verbatim reading of the rule is not required. People v. Dominguez, 2012 IL 111336, ¶¶ 17, 19.

     Rather, the court must substantially comply with the rule by conveying the substance or “essence”

     of the rule to a defendant. Id. ¶ 22. A court’s admonitions are sufficient for substantial compliance

     with the rule when “the defendant is properly informed, or put on notice, of what he must do in

     order to preserve his right to appeal his guilty plea or sentence.” Id. However, admonishments that

     fail to reference certain portions of Rule 605(c) altogether are inadequate. People v. Perry, 2014

     IL App (1st) 122584, ¶ 16. We review de novo whether the court substantially complied with the

     admonition requirements under Rule 605(c). People v. Young, 387 Ill. App. 3d 1126, 1127 (2009).

¶8          Here, the record reflects that the court did not substantially comply with Rule 605(c)

     because it did not provide any of the admonitions prescribed in subsections (3), (4), (5) and (6).

     See People v. Lloyd, 338 Ill. App. 3d 379, 384 (2003) (“The trial court is required to substantially

     admonish the defendant of all subsections of Rule 605(c).” (Emphasis added.)). By not addressing

     these subsections, the court failed to properly inform defendant of the potential consequences of

     withdrawing his plea, advise him of his right to appointed counsel, and explain that omitted claims

     would be waived.

¶9          Moreover, the brief admonitions that were given were confusing and misleading. After the

     court informed defendant in accordance with Rule 605(c)(2) that he would need to file a motion

     to vacate his guilty plea or he would waive his appeal rights, the court immediately followed with

     “[i]f you just want to appeal your sentence, then I—you need to do a motion—well, you can’t.

     You just have to vacate the guilty plea because there was a cap that was done in this case.” This

     admonishment suggested defendant could appeal his sentence without first filing a motion to

     withdraw his guilty plea. While the court attempted to correct the admonishment, it failed to do so

                                                      4
       with enough clarity to properly inform defendant of the prerequisite jurisdictional steps to taking

       an appeal pursuant to Rule 604(d). These incorrect admonitions seemingly contributed to

       defendant incorrectly filing a pro se notice of appeal to vacate his guilty plea. It is reasonable to

       assume that had all of the admonitions under Rule 605(c) been correctly provided, defendant may

       have instead filed the correct motion, perhaps even with the assistance of counsel, preserving his

       right to appeal.

¶ 10          In providing unclear admonitions and omitting the admonishments under subsections (3),

       (4), (5), and (6), the court did not substantially comply with Rule 605(c). Therefore, we remand

       the cause for proper admonishments in compliance with Rule 605(c) and the opportunity for

       defendant to file postplea motions under Rule 604(d). See id. at 385-86 (case remanded when court

       did not provide admonishments pursuant to subsections (3), (4), and (5) of Rule 605(c)).

¶ 11                                           III. CONCLUSION

¶ 12          For the reasons stated, we remand to the La Salle County circuit court for further

       proceedings.

¶ 13          Remanded.

                                                        5