Legal Question in Criminal Law in Illinois

rule 23

My son's appeal for Home Invasion was heard by appellate court and stamped rule 23. They stated that you do not have to have an order of protection filed against a person to commit home invasion. ILCS states you do if you have joint interest in the property such as being married as my son was. This is because of case of People vs Reid 1997. This is to protect people who have joint interest in property, because prior to Reid a person could not be convicted of H.I. on ones own home. IL Supreme Ct. agreed with appeals court. What does one do to get this corrected. Son's case was double jeopardy because they convicted him first on violation of O.P. first and sentenced to 1 yr. 2 weeks later convicted him of H.I. and got 5 yrs. Is ths considered a lesser included offense. Where do I go with this if I am right. U.S. Supreme Court


Asked on 2/08/08, 4:19 pm

1 Answer from Attorneys
George Zuganelis Zuganelis & Zuganelis, Attorneys at Law, P.C.

Re: rule 23

A rule 23 order is an order that allows the court to rule anyway they want and not publish it. The rules of double jeapordy are complex, and the fact that your son was convicted of that offense does not nessisarily bar a prosecution for home invasion. Also, home invasion is a class X felony, and the minimum time is 6 years. Perhaps you meant residential burglary, which carries a minimum sentence of 4 years. If your appellate lawyer added a federal constitutional issue to the appeal, and you have petitioned the IL. Supreme Court, your next step would be a petition for rehearing before the IL. Supreme Court if it's not too late. After that, the a petition to the US Supreme Court. Good luck.

Read more
Answered on 2/09/08, 11:29 am


Related Questions & Answers

More Criminal Law questions and answers in Illinois