From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Macke

Appellate Court of Illinois, Fifth District. Judgment affirmed
Jan 31, 1992
224 Ill. App. 3d 815 (Ill. App. Ct. 1992)

Summary

In Macke one of the districts of the appellate court held that section 5-8-1(c) requires a defendant to file a motion to reduce his sentence with the trial court within 30 days after the sentence is imposed before he may bring an appeal related solely to matters of sentencing. (Macke, 224 Ill. App.3d at 816.)

Summary of this case from People v. Lewis

Opinion

No. 5-90-0416

Opinion filed January 31, 1992.

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Shelby County; the Hon. E.C. Eberspacher, Judge, presiding.

Daniel M. Kirwan and Robert S. Burke, both of State Appellate Defender's Office, of Mt. Vernon, for appellant.

No brief filed for the People.


Defendant was convicted by a jury of armed robbery on May 8, 1990. The last day for him to file a post-trial motion was June 6, 1990. On June 22, 1990, defendant was sentenced to 25 years' imprisonment and ordered to pay $900 in restitution. Defendant appeals only his sentence, claiming that the circuit court erred by requiring him to pay restitution. Defendant failed to file a post-trial motion (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1989, ch. 38, par. 116-1(b)) or a motion to reduce his sentence (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1989, ch. 38, par. 1005-8-1(c)), and he did not object to restitution at his sentencing hearing. We affirm.

Defendant argues that it was impossible for him to file a post-trial motion (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1989, ch. 38, par. 116-1(b)), since the error did not occur until after the time period for filing a post-trial motion expired. Defendant claims that rejection of his argument on appeal for failure to file a post-trial motion under these circumstances would require defendants who allege no error at trial to file a post-trial motion prior to sentencing in order to preserve any error that might possibly occur. We, however, affirm for failure to file a motion to reduce a sentence. Ill. Rev. Stat. 1989, ch. 38, par. 1005-8-1(c).

• 1 Section 5-8-1(c) of the Unified Code of Corrections provides:

"A motion to reduce sentence may be made, or the court may reduce a sentence without motion, within 30 days after the sentence is imposed. * * *

If a motion to reduce a sentence is timely filed within 30 days after the sentence is imposed, the proponent of the motion shall exercise due diligence in seeking a determination on the motion and the court shall thereafter decide such motion within a reasonable time.

If a motion to reduce a sentence is timely filed within 30 days after the sentence is imposed, then for purposes of perfecting an appeal, a final judgment shall not be considered to have been entered until the motion to reduce a sentence has been decided by order entered by the trial court.

A motion to reduce a sentence shall not be considered to have been timely filed unless it is filed with the circuit court clerk within 30 days after the sentence is imposed * * *." (Emphasis added.) Ill. Rev. Stat. 1989, ch. 38, par. 1005-8-1(c).

Section 5-8-1(c) requires that before a defendant can appeal only his sentence, he must first file a motion to reduce his sentence with the trial court within 30 days after the sentence is imposed.

• 2 Requiring a defendant to file a motion to reduce his sentence is similar to requiring a post-trial motion to preserve issues on appeal (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1989, ch. 38, par. 116-1(b)) and requiring a defendant who pleads guilty to move to withdraw that plea before appealing. (134 Ill.2d R. 604(d).) Failure to file these motions denies the trial court the opportunity to correct any error that might have occurred and thereby burdens appellate counsel and the court of review with the time and expense of preparing and processing appeals. (See People v. Enoch (1988), 122 Ill.2d 176, 522 N.E.2d 1124, cert. denied (1988), 488 U.S. 917, 102 L.Ed.2d 263, 109 S.Ct. 274; People v. Wilk (1988), 124 Ill.2d 93, 529 N.E.2d 218.) As in Enoch, our decision in this case promotes judicial economy and finality of judgments. Enoch, 122 Ill.2d at 190, 522 N.E.2d at 1132.

Affirmed.

LEWIS and WELCH, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Macke

Appellate Court of Illinois, Fifth District. Judgment affirmed
Jan 31, 1992
224 Ill. App. 3d 815 (Ill. App. Ct. 1992)

In Macke one of the districts of the appellate court held that section 5-8-1(c) requires a defendant to file a motion to reduce his sentence with the trial court within 30 days after the sentence is imposed before he may bring an appeal related solely to matters of sentencing. (Macke, 224 Ill. App.3d at 816.)

Summary of this case from People v. Lewis

In People v. Macke (1992), 224 Ill. App.3d 815, 816, 587 N.E.2d 1113, 1115, we held compliance with this section to be mandatory to avoid waiver of sentencing issues when they were the sole issues on appeal.

Summary of this case from People v. Jenkins

In Macke, the fifth district held that a requirement for a post-sentencing motion to reduce is required, similar to the requirement of a post-trial motion to preserve issues on appeal. (See People v. Enoch (1988), 122 Ill.2d 176, 522 N.E.2d 1124; Macke, 224 Ill. App.3d at 816.

Summary of this case from People v. Moss

In Macke, the court concluded that section 5-8-1(c) of the Unified Code of Corrections requires a defendant to file a motion to reduce his sentence in the trial court within 30 days after the sentence was imposed in order to appeal only the sentence.

Summary of this case from People v. Lewis
Case details for

People v. Macke

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. EUGENE MACKE…

Court:Appellate Court of Illinois, Fifth District. Judgment affirmed

Date published: Jan 31, 1992

Citations

224 Ill. App. 3d 815 (Ill. App. Ct. 1992)
587 N.E.2d 1113

Citing Cases

People v. Lewis

" Ill. Rev. Stat. 1989, ch. 38, par. 1005-8-1(c). This language was recently interpreted by the Appellate…

People v. Jenkins

" Ill. Rev. Stat. 1991, ch. 38, par. 1005-8-1(c). In People v. Macke (1992), 224 Ill. App.3d 815, 816, 587…