People v. Bingham

Summary

The Illinois Supreme Court held that a defendant may not challenge a collateral sex-offender registration requirement on direct appeal from a criminal conviction when the requirement was not imposed by the trial court and is not directly related to the judgment under review. The court also held that the defendant's as-applied constitutional challenge was premature because it had not been developed through an evidentiary hearing and factual findings. The court affirmed in part and vacated in part the appellate court's judgment and dismissed the appeal.

Holdings

1. A reviewing court has no power on direct appeal of a criminal conviction to order relief from a sex-offender-registration obligation when the obligation was neither imposed by the trial court nor directly related to the order or conviction being appealed.
2. An as-applied constitutional challenge may not properly be litigated for the first time on review when there has been no evidentiary hearing and no factual findings concerning the specific facts and circumstances underlying the challenge.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a reviewing court may decide on direct appeal from a criminal conviction a constitutional challenge to a collateral sex-offender-registration obligation that was not imposed by the trial court and is not embodied in the judgment under review.
2. Whether an as-applied constitutional challenge may be raised for the first time on appeal without an evidentiary hearing or factual findings concerning the challenged application.
3. Whether the appellate court's merits ruling on Bingham's substantive-due-process and ex post facto challenges should remain undisturbed.

Disposition

dismissed