People v. Goossens

2015 IL 118347 (Ill. 2015) · Supreme Court of Illinois · October 30, 2015 · No. 118347

Summary

The Illinois Supreme Court held that a trial court had statutory authority under 730 ILCS 5/5-6-3(b)(6) to require payment of child support as a condition of probation for a defendant convicted of intimidation. The court affirmed the appellate and circuit court judgments and rejected the argument that every enumerated probation condition must relate to the nature of the offense. The court overruled People v. Campbell and its progeny to the extent they conflicted with this holding.

Court
Supreme Court of Illinois
Writing for the Court
Justice Karmeier; Chief Justice Garman; Justice Freeman; Justice Thomas; Justice Kilbride; Justice Burke; Justice Theis
Jurisdiction
Illinois
Decision date
October 30, 2015
Docket number
118347
Procedural posture
Defendant appealed his conviction and probation sentence, challenging the trial court's authority to require payment of child support as a condition of probation. The Illinois Supreme Court allowed leave to appeal from the appellate court's affirmance.
Standard of review
Statutory construction is reviewed de novo. The imposition of probation conditions authorized by statute is reviewed under the statutory authority granted to the trial court; challenges to discretionary conditions are subject to the applicable reasonableness and relatedness requirements.
Precedential value
Published Illinois Supreme Court opinion; precedential
Parties
Raymond Goossens v. The People of the State of Illinois
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

probationsentencingstatutory interpretationcriminal procedure

Practice areas

criminal lawcriminal proceduresentencingprobationstatutory interpretation

Questions Presented

  1. Whether section 5-6-3(b) of the Unified Code of Corrections authorized the trial court to require payment of child support as a condition of probation for an intimidation conviction unrelated to the child-support obligation.
  2. Whether the defendant's claim that the probation condition created an impermissibly indeterminate period of probation was properly preserved for review.

Holdings

  1. Section 5-6-3(b)(6), which permits a court to require a probationer to support his dependents, authorizes a trial court to impose child-support payments as a condition of probation even when the condition does not relate to the nature of the offense.
  2. The defendant's argument that the child-support condition created an impermissibly indeterminate period of probation was not properly preserved because it was raised for the first time during oral argument and was not included in the petition for leave to appeal.

Key quotations

The enumerated conditions that may be imposed under section 5-6-3(b) represent the legislature’s considered judgment that those conditions may be imposed at the court’s discretion for any offense. (¶ 13)
Accordingly, we reject Campbell’s interpretation that all conditions of probation, including those expressly enumerated, must relate to the nature of the offense. (¶ 16)
For the above stated reasons, we conclude that the trial court had the statutory authority to order child support payments as a condition of probation. (¶ 19)

Factual background

Raymond Goossens, a police sergeant, was convicted of intimidation after threatening not to respond to 911 calls from a local racetrack while two former police officers remained employed there. The circuit court sentenced him to two years' probation and required him to become current on more than three and a half years of unpaid child support, totaling $11,779.89. The child-support condition was based on the amount identified in the presentencing investigation report.

Procedural history

A Rock Island County jury convicted Raymond Goossens of intimidation, and the circuit court sentenced him to two years' probation with a condition requiring him to become current on child support. The Appellate Court for the Third District affirmed. The Illinois Supreme Court granted defendant's petition for leave to appeal and affirmed both the appellate and circuit court judgments.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…