Court Opinion

ID: 9861139
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 23:46:39.167064+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:27:18.940770
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE RAPP, dissenting: I respectfully dissent. I disagree with my colleagues’ interpretation of People v. Linder, 186 Ill. 2d 67 (1999), recently decided by the supreme court. I would have dismissed that portion of this appeal that seeks review of defendant’s sentence. Since the State agreed to nolpros a theft charge and to forego prosecution of further charges against defendant and his mother, I feel that the proper interpretation and extension of the rule announced in Linder would be to require the defendant to withdraw his guilty plea and vacate the judgment against him before appealing the decision rendered by the trial court. See People v. Knowles, 304 Ill. App. 3d 472 (1999). In that circumstance, if the motion to withdraw the plea were granted, the State, if it so chose, could reinstate the dismissed or foregone charges, and the parties would return to their original positions.