Illinois Supreme Court Asked to Review the Application of Illinois’ “One-Act, One-Crime Doctrine” and “Double Jeopardy” to Defendant’s Acquital for the Same Offense

For Immediate Release: June 1, 2015

Springfield, IL – On remand following reversal of her convictions disorderly conduct (People v. Brown, 2013 IL App (2d) 111228), on May 30, 3014, Defendant filed a motion to dismiss the charges against her alleging that the government was attempting to obtain a conviction for an act that she was previously acquitted. The circuit denied the motion and Defendant filed her notice of interlocutory appeal as a matter of right (SCR 604(f)). The appellate court affirmed the circuit court's denial of dismissal.

In her petition to the Supreme Court, Defendant argued that the appellate court’s application of Illinois’ “one-act, one-crime doctrine” and “double jeopardy” to Defendant's acquittal for the same offense conflicts with this Court’s rulings on those issues in People v. Miller, 238 Ill. 2d 161 (2010) and People v. Ortiz, 196 Ill. 2d 236 (2001), respectively. In doing so, a panel of the Second District has refused to follow Supreme Court precedent (and the precedent of the Supreme Court of the United States) and to apply stare decisis. Additionally, Defendant argued that the Illinois legislature prohibits multiple prosecutions for the same act. 720 ILCS 5/3-3 and 5/3-4. Under Evans v. Michigan, 133 S. Ct. 1069 (2013), the Double Jeopardy Clause bars retrial of the defendant following an acquittal even if it is “based upon an egregiously erroneous foundation” or is a “mistaken acquittal”. Evans, 133 S. Ct. at 1074.

WHAT: Petition for Leave to Appeal in Brown v. People (Docket No. 119344) seeking review of the Second District's decision reported at People v. Brown, 2015 IL App (2nd) 140809-U.

WHO: Craig M. Sandberg of the law firm of Muslin & Sandberg.

WHERE: Supreme Court of Illinois, Supreme Court Building, 200 East Capital Avenue, Springfield, Illinois