APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, FIRST DIVISION
508 N.E.2d 326, 155 Ill. App. 3d 469, 108 Ill. Dec. 165 1987.IL.544
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Donald E. Joyce, Judge, presiding.
JUSTICE O'CONNOR delivered the opinion of the court. QUINLAN, P.J., and BUCKLEY, J., concur.
DECISION OF THE COURT DELIVERED BY THE HONORABLE JUDGE O'CONNOR
The State appeals from the trial court's order dismissing the indictment against defendants, Michael Freedman and Randall Moore.
On appeal, the State contends that (1) the trial court improperly dismissed the bribery and solicitation counts of the indictment because defendants' conduct fell within the ambit of section 33-1 of the Illinois Criminal Code of 1961 (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1981, ch. 38, par. 33-1); (2) the court improperly dismissed count VIII of the indictment because considering the indictment in its entirety, it apprised defendants that they were charged with having committed a felony of theft by deception of property exceeding $300 in value; and (3) the court improperly dismissed the indictment because the nolle prosequi sought and obtained by the State tolled the running of the speedy trial period. For the reasons that follow, we reverse and remand.
Defendants are attorneys licensed to practice law in Illinois. On March 25, 1982, defendants were indicted by the grand jury of the circuit court of Cook County for bribery (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1981, ch. 38, par. 33-1(d)) (counts I, II, IV, V, VI); solicitation (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1981, ch. 38, par. 33-1(e)) (count III); and theft (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1981, ch. 38, par. 16-1(b)) (counts VII, VIII, IX), which occurred between December 15, 1981, and January 21, 1982. Defendants were subsequently indicted on November 24, 1982, in the Federal District Court for the Northern District of Illinois for offenses arising out of some of the same acts on which the State charges were based.
Five days later, on November 29, 1982, the State moved to nolpros the State charges pending against defendants, without stating any reason for the motion. Defendants objected and demanded trial. The court allowed the State's motion over defendants' objection.
The district court dismissed the Federal indictment on July 26, 1983. Thereafter, on December 14, 1984, one day before the running of the felony statute of limitations, the State reindicted defendants on charges identical to those which the State originally nol-prossed.
The present indictment charges defendants with soliciting and receiving money from their client, in amounts ranging from $300 to approximately $3,000, with the understanding that defendants would tender the money to a Judge to influence him in order to obtain a favorable ruling for their client in a criminal case pending before that Judge.
Defendants are also charged with theft by deception in that defendants "knowingly obtained by deception control over" their client's money, in amounts ranging from $300 to $1,500, with the intent to permanently deprive the client of the use and benefit of his property.
Defendants filed three motions to dismiss the indictment. Those motions requested dismissal of: (1) counts I through VI charging bribery and solicitation; (2) count VIII charging theft by deception; and (3) the entire indictment. After hearing arguments on defendants' ...