JUSTICE THEIS delivered the judgment of the court, with
opinion. Chief Justice Karmeier and Justices Freeman, Thomas,
Kilbride, Garman, and Burke concurred in the judgment and
1 The issue presented in this appeal is whether the circuit
court's plea admonishments regarding mandatory supervised
release (MSR) were sufficient to satisfy the due process
rights of defendant, Byron Boykins. Defendant filed a pro
se postconviction petition in the circuit court of Cook
County pursuant to the Post-Conviction Hearing Act (725 ILCS
5/122-1 et seq. (West 2014)), alleging that his due
process rights were violated when the trial court failed to
specifically admonish him that he would be required to serve
a 3-year term of MSR after completing the 22-year prison
sentence he negotiated in exchange for his plea. The circuit
court summarily dismissed the petition. The appellate court
affirmed the dismissal. 2016 IL App (1st) 142542-U. For the
following reasons, we affirm the judgment of the appellate
3 In 2007, defendant was charged by indictment with six
counts of first degree murder and six counts of aggravated
unlawful use of a weapon (AUUW) (720 ILCS 5/24-1.6 (West
2006)). In March 2009, defendant entered into a negotiated
plea in which he agreed to plead guilty to first degree
murder in exchange for 22 years' imprisonment, the
dismissal of the AUUW charges, and the dismissal of a
separate pending charge for possession of a stolen motor
vehicle. Defendant was 20 years old at the time of the plea
hearing. Prior to accepting the plea, the following exchange
"THE COURT: Mr. Boykins, you're charged with the
offense of first degree murder. That event is alleged to have
occurred on or about October the 16th of the year of 2006, in
that you, without lawful justification, intentionally or
knowingly killed-shot and killed Carlos Mathis, M-a-t-h-i-s.
In the State of Illinois that's referred to as-the
sentencing for that case is from 20 to 40-20 to 60 years in
the Illinois State penitentiary. If I find that you've
been found guilty of the same or greater class felony in the
last ten years, the maximum penitentiary time in this case
would be life.
Upon your release from the penitentiary, there is a period of
three years mandatory supervised release, sometimes referred
to as parole.
Understanding the nature of the offense and its possible
penalties, how do you plead to this matter; guilty or not
THE DEFENDANT: Guilty."
The trial court then confirmed that defendant was aware of
the rights he would be giving up by entering a guilty plea
and confirmed that he was entering the plea of his own free
will. Additionally, the court reiterated the terms of the
agreement that "in this particular situation, "
defendant was agreeing to plead guilty in exchange for
"a period of 22[ ]years in the Illinois Department of
Corrections." Defendant indicated that he had no
4 After finding that a factual basis existed for the plea,
the court accepted the plea and ratified the agreement.
Defendant waived his right to a presentence investigation
report, but the court was informed that defendant had several
juvenile adjudications, that he was 17 years old at the time
of the occurrence, and that he had no prior adult arrests.
The court then imposed a sentence of 22 years in prison.
Defendant again indicated that he had no questions about the
sentence. The trial court did not mention MSR during
sentencing, and the sentencing order does not refer to MSR.
5 In April 2014, defendant filed a pro se
postconviction petition alleging that his constitutional due
process rights were substantially violated because he was not
advised that he would be required to serve a 3-year term of
MSR upon completion of the 22-year prison sentence that he
negotiated in exchange for his plea. Consequently, defendant
alleged that he did not receive the benefit of his bargain
because the total time he would be required to serve would
exceed the term specifically announced by the trial court.
Defendant further asserted that he had not been aware of the
MSR term until he heard other inmates discussing it. As a
remedy, defendant requested that the trial court reduce his
prison term by three years or, alternatively, remove his
obligation to serve the MSR term.
6 The trial court summarily dismissed the petition, finding
that the record contradicted defendant's allegations. The
court concluded that the trial court sufficiently admonished
defendant by advising him prior to imposing the sentence ...