Court of Appeals of Illinois, First District, First Division
from the Circuit Court of Cook County. No. 14 CR 11358
Honorable Vincent M. Gaughan, Judge Presiding.
JUSTICE MIKVA delivered the judgment of the court, with
opinion. Presiding Justice Connors and Justice Harris
concurred in the judgment and opinion
1 Following a jury trial, defendant Robert Glass was
convicted of delivery of a controlled substance (720 ILCS
570/401(c)(1) (West 2014)) and sentenced to five years'
imprisonment. On appeal, Mr. Glass contends that the $500
public defender reimbursement fee assessed against him must
be vacated because no hearing was held to determine his
ability to pay. He further challenges various fines, fees,
and costs imposed by the trial court. We vacate the
challenged fines and fees; modify the fines, fees, and costs
order; and remand for a second hearing on whether Mr. Glass
should be required to reimburse any part of the cost of his
public defender and, if so, what amount.
3 Mr. Glass was charged with delivery of a controlled
substance. He was appointed a public defender. At trial,
three officers testified and established that, on June 10,
2014, Mr. Glass sold three bags of white powder,
"suspect heroin," to an undercover officer in
exchange for $30 in prerecorded funds near 3421 West Lake
Street in Chicago. A "drug chemist" testified the
powder weighed 1.1 grams and tested positive for heroin. The
jury found Mr. Glass guilty of delivery of a controlled
substance, and the case proceeded to sentencing.
4 The trial court sentenced Mr. Glass to five years'
imprisonment on October 9, 2014. It imposed fines and fees
totaling $2839 and credited Mr. Glass with 122 days served.
It denied Mr. Glass's posttrial motions and admonished
him of his rights on appeal. The State filed a motion for
reimbursement of funds. The following was the entire exchange
regarding that motion:
"THE COURT: [Defense counsel], how many times have you
appeared on this?
DEFENSE COUNSEL: Eight times, your honor.
THE COURT: And plus it was a jury trial. $500 would be
appropriate." Mr. Glass timely appealed.
6 A. Public Defender Fee
7 On appeal, Mr. Glass contends that the trial court
improperly assessed the $500 public defender reimbursement
fee without holding a hearing to determine his ability to pay
and thus the fee should be vacated. The State concedes that
the trial court did not conduct a sufficient hearing but
argues that we should remand the matter for a hearing on Mr.
Glass's ability to pay any part of this fee. Mr. Glass
failed to object to the imposition of the public defender fee
at his sentencing hearing but argues, and we agree, that this
issue is not subject to forfeiture. See People v.
Love, 177 Ill. 2d 550');">177 Ill. 2d 550, 564 (1997); see also People
v. Carreon, 2011 IL App (2d) 100391, ¶ 11
(forfeiture rule inappropriate where trial court imposed
public defender reimbursement fee "without following the
appropriate procedural requirements").
8 Pursuant to section 113-3.1 of the Illinois Code of
Criminal Procedure (Code), the trial court may order a
defendant to pay a reasonable sum, up to a statutory maximum,
to reimburse the county or State for representation by
appointed counsel, the amount of which is to be determined at
a hearing where the court must consider the defendant's
financial circumstances. 725 ILCS 5/113-3.1 (West 2014).
Compliance with the statute requires the trial court to give
the defendant notice that it is considering imposing the fee
and an opportunity to present evidence regarding the
defendant's ability to pay. People v. Somers,
2013 IL 114054, ¶ 14. The statute requires that the
"hearing shall be conducted on the court's own
motion or on motion of the State's Attorney at any time
after the appointment of counsel but no later than 90 days
after the entry of a final order disposing of the case at the
trial level." 725 ILCS 5/113-3.1(a) (West 2014). Our
supreme court made clear in Love that, to comply
with section 113-3.1(a), "[t]he hearing must focus on