People v. Morgan

SUPREME COURT CASES

Laws-info.com » Cases » Illinois » 3rd District Appellate » 2007 » People v. Morgan

People v. Morgan

State: Illinois

Court: 3rd District Appellate

Docket No: 3-06-0362 NRel

Case Date: 12/14/2007

Preview:No. 3--06--0362 ______________________________________________________________________________ Filed December 14, 2007. IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS THIRD DISTRICT A.D., 2007 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Appeal from the Circuit Court for the 14th Judicial Circuit, Rock Island County, Illinois

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JEFFREY MORGAN, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 05-CF-260

Honorable Charles H. Stengel, Judge, Presiding.

______________________________________________________________________________ JUSTICE CARTER delivered the opinion of the court: ______________________________________________________________________________ Defendant, Jeffrey Morgan, a convicted child sex offender, was convicted following a jury trial of knowingly residing within 500 feet of a school building that persons under the age of 18 attended (720 ILCS 5/11-9.3(b-5) (West 2006). Defendant was sentenced to 30 months' probation and fined. Defendant appeals his conviction and fines. We affirm in part and vacate and remand in part. FACTS Defendant was convicted in 1997 of a sex offense involving a child. In 1998 the Illinois General Assembly prohibited the presence of child sex offenders in school zones. 720 ILCS 5/11-9.3 (West 2006). In July 2000 an amendment was added prohibiting child sex offenders from residing 1

within 500 feet of a school that children under the age of 18 attended. 720 ILCS 5/11-9.3(b-5) (West 2006). Defendant was released from prison in 1999. In April 2005 defendant was arrested for living within 500 feet of the Longfellow School in Rock Island, Illinois and charged under section 11-9.3(b5). Defendant was convicted at jury trial in October 2005 and sentenced to 30 months probation. He was also fined $1,000 and an additional $40 for the Violent Crime Victims Assistance Fund. Defendant now appeals. ANALYSIS On appeal, defendant contends that section 11-9.3(b-5) of the Illinois Criminal Code violates the ex post facto clause of the constitution. He also contends that his $40 fine for the Violent Crime Victims Assistance Fund should be vacated and that he should receive a $40 credit against the larger fine. Defendant contends that section 11-9.3(b-5) violates the ex post facto clause of the both the Illinois and United States Constitutions. Specifically, defendant argues that he is being punished under the statute for a crime that he committed before the statute took effect in July 2000. The State counters that the ex post facto clauses have not been violated because the offense defined in the statute is a new offense for which being a child sex offender is merely one factor and that, further, even if ex post facto analysis is appropriate, the statute does not have a punitive effect so as to violate ex post facto provisions. The Constitution of the United States provides that no state shall pass any ex post facto law. U.S. Const., art. I,

Download People v. Morgan.pdf