People v. Carney

Summary

The Illinois Supreme Court reviewed whether section 5–8–4(a) of the Illinois Unified Code of Corrections, which may require consecutive sentences for certain offenses involving severe bodily injury, was unconstitutional under Apprendi v. New Jersey. The court held that Apprendi did not apply because consecutive sentences remain separate sentences for separate offenses and do not increase the sentence for any individual offense beyond its statutory maximum. The court reversed the appellate court and remanded for consideration of the defendant’s other unresolved issues.

Holdings

1. Consecutive sentences imposed under section 5-8-4(a) do not violate defendants' due process rights, and Apprendi does not apply to the judicial fact finding used to impose those sentences.
2. Consecutive sentences constitute distinct sentences for the separate offenses of conviction and may not be aggregated into a single sentence for purposes of applying Apprendi.
3. The cause must be remanded to the appellate court to consider the other issues Carney raised but that court did not address.

Questions Presented

1. Whether section 5-8-4(a) of the Unified Code of Corrections violates the due process principles recognized in Apprendi v. New Jersey by permitting a judge, rather than a jury, to find severe bodily injury and require consecutive sentences.
2. Whether consecutive sentences imposed under section 5-8-4(a) must be treated as a single sentence or as increased punishment for purposes of Apprendi.
3. Whether the appellate court should consider Carney's other arguments that it had not addressed.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded