Court Opinion

ID: 9519818
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 01:25:26.889513+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:41:11.111431
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE RARICK, dissenting: I respectfully dissent from the opinion of the court because I believe the instant appeal should have been dismissed pursuant to defendant’s motion to dismiss. This court has stated: “ ‘By numerous decisions this court has held that no right is more clearly established than that of an appellant to dismiss his appeal, regardless of the protest of the appellee. [Citations.] The appellant in an appeal *** may always dismiss the appeal *** before a decision on the merits, and the effect of such dismissal is to leave the parties where they were before the appeal was taken ***.” People ex rel. Waite v. Bristow, 391 Ill. 101, Ill (1945), quoting First National Bank of Kewanee v. Union State Savings Bank & Trust Co., 350 Ill. 21, 22 (1932). Accord Safeway Insurance Co. v. American Arbitration Ass’n, 247 Ill. App. 3d 355, 358-59 (1993). In this case, defendant moved for dismissal of the appeal after the Governor commuted his death sentence to natural life imprisonment. The State did not object to defendant’s motion to dismiss because, from the State’s perspective, there was no point in doing so: dismissal would have left defendant’s convictions for aggravated kidnapping and murder intact, as well as respective sentences of 15 years and natural life. It makes no sense for this court to deny defendant’s motion to dismiss his appeal so that it can issue an opinion that leaves him in the same position he would have been in had the appeal been dismissed pursuant to his request. In its current procedural posture, this appeal presents no actual controversy and this court’s decision is nothing more than an advisory opinion. See People ex rel. Partee v. Murphy, 133 Ill. 2d 402, 408 (1990). Under the circumstances, an opinion from this court is simply unnecessary. JUSTICE KILBRIDE joins in this dissent.