THE VILLAGE OF SUGAR GROVE, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Defendant-Appellant. | ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) | Appeal from the Circuit Court of Kane County. Nos. 02--OV--3219 02--OV--3220 02--OV--3221 02--OV--3222 02--OV--3223 02--OV--3224 02--OV--3225 02--OV--3226 02--OV--3227 Honorable |
In this consolidated appeal, the defendant, James Rich, was issued 13 citations for violatingthe noise control ordinance of the plaintiff, the Village of Sugar Grove (the Village). Following abench trial, the defendant was convicted on eight of the citations, sentenced to supervision, and fined$50 for each infraction. The trial court dismissed without prejudice the remaining citations. Thedefendant appeals five of his convictions. He also appeals the dismissal of four of the citations. Onappeal, the defendant argues that (1) the Village's noise control ordinance violation is preempted bystate law; (2) the trial court erred in refusing to admit into evidence a document that allegedly fellwithin the business document exception to the hearsay rule; and (3) his multiple convictions violatethe one-act, one-crime doctrine.
The following facts have been discerned from the parties' bystanders report and the commonlaw record.
The defendant received 13 citations for violating section 4--5--1 of the Village Code of theVillage of Sugar Grove (the Village Code). Section 4--5--1 of the Village Code provides:
"NOISE PROHIBITED: It shall be unlawful for any person to make, continue, orcause to be made or continued any excessive, unnecessary or unusually loud noise or anynoise which either annoys, disturbs, injures or endangers the comfort, repose, health, peaceor safety with others within the Village." Sugar Grove Village Code