Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

People v. J.F.

Court of Appeals of Illinois, First District, Third Division

May 7, 2014

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Petitioner-Appellee,
v.
J.F., Respondent-Appellant

As Corrected.

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County. 11 JD 5020. The Honorable Colleen F. Sheehan, Judge, presiding.

SYLLABUS

The imposition of the mandatory minimum probation term on respondent minor for a forcible felony, aggravated battery, did not violate her right to equal protection, notwithstanding her contention that she was treated worse than juveniles who commit nonforcible felonies and adults who commit the same offense, since respondent could not show that she was similarly situated to either group; however, the trial court did violate the one-act, one-crime doctrine by adjudicating respondent guilty of both aggravated battery and battery for the same physical act of hitting and biting another girl, and, therefore, the adjudication of battery was vacated.

For PETITIONER-APPELLEE: Alan J. Spellberg, Mary Needham, Kathryn A. Schierl, State's Attorney Cook County, Chicago, Illinois.

For RESPONDENT-APPELLEE: Shawn O'Toole, Office of the State Appellate Defender, Chicago, IL.

PRESIDING JUSTICE HYMAN delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion. Justices Neville and Mason concur in the judgment and opinion.

OPINION

Page 399

HYMAN, PRESIDING JUSTICE.

[¶1] Respondent, J.F., was 15 years old when adjudicated delinquent for a forcible felony. She raises an equal protection challenge to her mandatory minimum probation term of five years required under the Juvenile Court Act of 1987 (Act) (705 ILCS 405/5-715 (1) (West 2010)). The gist of her argument is that the mandatory minimum treats juveniles who commit forcible felonies (i) worse than those who commit nonforcible felonies despite their otherwise being similarly situated and (ii) harsher than adult offenders for the same offense. We find the mandatory minimum does not violate the equal protection clause because J.F. cannot establish that she is similarly situated to juveniles who commit nonforcible felonies or that a criminal conviction of an adult offender equates to a finding of delinquency.

[¶2] In addition, J.F. asserts, and the State concedes, that the juvenile court departed from the one-act, one-crime doctrine when it adjudicated her delinquent of both aggravated battery and battery for the same physical act. We agree, and vacate the lesser offense of battery.

[¶3] BACKGROUND

[¶4] In November 2011, the State filed a petition for adjudication of ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.