Court Opinion

ID: 9966398
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-05-06 21:03:22.854876+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:24:56.372848
License: Public Domain

NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as
      precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1).

                                        2024 IL App (3d) 230787-U

                                   Order filed May 3, 2024
      ____________________________________________________________________________

                                                  IN THE

                                    APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS

                                            THIRD DISTRICT

                                                   2024

      THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF                      )      Appeal from the Circuit Court
      ILLINOIS,                                       )      of the 12th Judicial Circuit,
                                                      )      Will County, Illinois,
             Plaintiff-Appellee,                      )
                                                      )      Appeal No. 3-23-0787
             v.                                       )      Circuit No. 21-CF-1686
                                                      )
      WILLIAM J. JENKINS,                             )      Honorable
                                                      )      Kenneth L. Zelazo,
             Defendant-Appellant.                     )      Judge, Presiding.
      ____________________________________________________________________________

            JUSTICE HETTEL delivered the judgment of the court.
            Justices Brennan and Davenport concurred in the judgment.
      ____________________________________________________________________________

                                                ORDER

¶1          Held: We lack jurisdiction to consider defendant’s initial detention order because
                  defendant did not timely appeal it and affirm continued detention order because
                  defendant raises no argument concerning it.

¶2          The Will County circuit court entered orders to detain defendant, William J. Jenkins, on

     October 24, 2023, and December 13, 2023. On December 27, 2023, defendant filed his notice of

     appeal, appealing the court’s December 13, 2023, order. On appeal, defendant’s counsel argued
     that the circuit court erred in entering its October 24, 2023, detention order. We lack jurisdiction

     to consider that order and affirm the December 13, 2023, order.

¶3                                          I. BACKGROUND

¶4          Defendant, William J. Jenkins, was indicted on December 9, 2021, for three counts of

     delivery of a controlled substance (720 ILCS 570/401(c)(2), (d)(1) (West 2020)). Defendant’s

     bond was set at $500,000, but he remained in custody. Four months later, the grand jury returned

     a five-count indictment against defendant in Will County case No. 22-CF-419. In that case,

     defendant’s bond was set at $1,000,000, and he remained in custody.

¶5          On October 3, 2023, defendant, as a self-represented litigant, filed a motion for pretrial

     release in case No. 22-CF-419. In his motion, defendant stated that he was also indicted and

     remained detained in this case. The State filed a verified petition to deny pretrial release in case

     No. 22-CF-419. Following a hearing, on October 24, 2023, the court entered a joint pretrial

     detention order in this case and case No. 22-CF-419, finding that the proof was evident that

     defendant committed a detainable offense, he posed a real and present threat to the safety of any

     person or the community, and no conditions could mitigate this threat. The court also found he had

     a high likelihood of willful flight to avoid prosecution. The order stated that the court based its

     decision on the nature and circumstances of the offenses, defendant’s prior criminal history, the

     identity of any persons to whose safety defendant posed a threat and the nature of the threat,

     defendant was on release at the time of the offenses, and defendant had a significant history of

     obstruction, escape, and flight. A transcript from the hearing is not included in the record, and

     defendant did not appeal that order.

¶6          On November 29, 2023, defendant, as a self-represented litigant, filed a motion for GPS

     pretrial release in case No. 22-CF-419. In his motion, defendant again stated that he was also

                                                      2
       indicted and being held in custody in this case. The court held a hearing on December 12 and 13,

       2023. Counsel for defendant conceded that no motion for pretrial release was filed in this case. On

       December 13, 2023, the court stated that it considered the statutory factors and determined that

       GPS monitoring would not mitigate defendant’s dangerousness. The court issued a joint detention

       order in this case and case No. 22-CF-419, which was substantially similar to the October detention

       order.

¶7              On December 27, 2023, defendant filed his notice of appeal. The notice of appeal listed the

       trial court’s December 13, 2023, order as the order being appealed. Counsel was appointed to

       represent defendant in his appeal.

¶8                                                II. ANALYSIS

¶9              On appeal, defendant’s counsel contends that the court lacked power to enter the October

       24, 2023, detention order because the State did not file a petition to detain defendant in this case.

       The State responds that we lack jurisdiction to review the propriety of the October detention order

       because defendant did not timely appeal that order.

¶ 10            We turn first to the question of our jurisdiction. A defendant is entitled to appeal any order

       denying pretrial release. 725 ILCS 5/110-6.1(j) (West 2022). Illinois Supreme Court Rule 604(h)

       governs appeals from orders denying pretrial release. Ill. S. Ct. R. 604(h) (eff. Oct. 19, 2023). At

       the time of the circuit court’s orders in this case, Rule 604(h)(2) provided: “Review shall be by

       Notice of Appeal filed in the circuit court within 14 days of the entry or denial of the order from

       which review is being sought.” Id. 1

                1
                    The supreme court has since amended Rule 604(h). See Ill. S. Ct. Rule 604(h) (eff. Apr.

       15, 2024)). We apply the rule in effect at the time the court’s orders were entered. See People v.

                                                          3
¶ 11          “The filing of a notice of appeal is the jurisdictional step which initiates appellate review.”

       (Internal quotation marks omitted.) People v. Smith, 228 Ill. 2d 95, 104 (2008). “An untimely

       notice of appeal deprives the reviewing court of jurisdiction.” People v. Hongo, 2024, IL App (1st)

       232482, ¶ 25.

¶ 12          Here, the circuit court entered its initial detention order on October 24, 2023. Defendant

       could have appealed that order on the basis that the circuit court lacked authority to enter it because

       the State never filed a petition to detain. See People v. Shockley, 2024 IL App (5th) 240041, ¶ 18

       (vacating detention order where State did not file a petition to detain). However, defendant did not

       appeal the initial detention order. Instead, defendant filed a notice of appeal from the circuit court’s

       order for continued detention entered on December 13, 2023. Because defendant did not timely

       appeal the trial court’s October 24, 2023, initial detention order, we lack jurisdiction to review it.

       See id. ¶ 28.

¶ 13          We have jurisdiction to review the December 13, 2023, order requiring defendant’s

       continued detention for which defendant filed a timely notice of appeal. See id. ¶ 31. However,

       defendant raises no issues with that order. While defendant’s notice of appeal checks boxes for

       grounds for relief, defendant did not raise these issues in his subsequent memorandum. Defendant

       has, thus, forfeited any issues raised in his notice of appeal that are not argued in his memorandum.

       People v. Mitchell, 2024 IL App (3d) 230758, ¶ 15; People v. Forthenberry, 2024 IL App (5th)

       231002, ¶ 42. Therefore, we affirm the circuit court’s December 13, 2023, detention order.

¶ 14                                           III. CONCLUSION

       Ponder, 10 Ill. App. 3d 613, 619 (1973) (applying supreme court rule in effect at the time in

       question, not amended version enacted later).

                                                          4
¶ 15   The judgment of the circuit court of Will County is affirmed.

¶ 16   Affirmed.

                                               5