People v. Hill

Summary

The Illinois Appellate Court, First District, affirmed Eddie Hill’s aggregate 30-year sentence for two attempted first degree murder convictions after a second resentencing hearing. The court held that Hill forfeited his claim that the circuit court predetermined the sentence and, in any event, the record showed that the circuit court conducted the required resentencing hearing and considered the relevant evidence, arguments, mitigation, and sentencing range. The court distinguished cases involving a sentencing judge’s refusal to consider permissible sentencing options.

Holdings

1. When an appellate court vacates a sentence and remands for resentencing without imposing the replacement sentence itself, section 5-5-3(d) of the Unified Code of Corrections requires the trial court to conduct a sentencing hearing before imposing a new sentence.
2. The circuit court complied with section 5-5-3(d) by conducting a second sentencing hearing, considering the prior sentencing materials and new evidence, hearing the parties' arguments, and allowing Hill an opportunity for additional allocution.
3. The circuit court did not predetermine Hill's sentence, violate due process, or abuse its discretion by imposing a total sentence of 30 years after the second resentencing hearing.
4. Hill forfeited his claim because he neither made a contemporaneous objection nor raised the alleged predetermination in his written post-sentencing motion, and plain-error review was unavailable because no error occurred.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the circuit court was required to conduct a second resentencing hearing after the appellate court vacated the prior sentence and remanded with instructions that the new sentence not exceed 30 years.
2. Whether the circuit court violated due process or abused its discretion by allegedly predetermining that Hill would receive the maximum 30-year sentence.
3. Whether Hill could obtain plain-error review of the unpreserved sentencing claim.

Disposition

affirmed