Opinion
No. 2-15-1088 No. 2-15-1094 cons.
11-16-2017
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. UBALDO CRUZ, Defendant-Appellant.
NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1).
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Lake County.
No. 14-CF-2891
Honorable George D. Strickland, Judge, Presiding.
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Lake County.
No. 14-CF-1453
Honorable George D. Strickland, Judge, Presiding.
JUSTICE JORGENSEN delivered the judgment of the court.
Justices McLaren and Spence concurred in the judgment.
ORDER
¶ 1 Held: (1) We reduced defendant's probation fees to reflect his actual time on probation, and we vacated a probation transfer fee to reflect the fact that no transfer
occurred; (2) defendant was entitled to full credit against various fines, to reflect his time in presentencing custody.
¶ 2 Defendant, Ubaldo Cruz, appeals, asking that we modify his sentences in two cases by (1) reducing his total probation services fee from $1,440 to $200, (2) vacating his $125 probation transfer fee, and (3) ordering that, in each of the cases, he receive credit of $570 against his eligible fines based on the $5-per-day credit of section 110-14(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (725 ILCS 5/110-14(a) (West 2014)). The State agrees on all points save one of arithmetic; to the extent that there is disagreement, we hold defendant is nevertheless entitled to the relief he seeks. We therefore order the reductions and credits that defendant seeks.
¶ 3 I. BACKGROUND
¶ 4 This consolidated appeal arises from two cases, No. 14-CF-2891 and No. 14-CF-1453. Defendant entered a negotiated guilty plea to one felony count of violating an order of protection (720 ILCS 5/12-3.4(a)(1) (West 2012)) in each of the cases, and, on May 26, 2015, the court sentenced him to concurrent 30-month terms of probation with 6 months of periodic imprisonment. The court ordered that he receive 287 days of presentence-custody credit in case No. 14-CF-1453 (for "8-12-15 [sic]" to "5-26-15") and 216 days of presentence custody credit in case No. 14-CF-2891 (for "10-22-15 [sic]" to "5-26-15"). (August 12, 2014, to May 26, 2015, is 288 days, inclusive of starting and ending days; October 10, 2014, to May 26, 2015, is 217 days, inclusive of starting and ending days. Further, the days for which the court gave defendant credit in case No. 14-CF-2891 are entirely included in the days for which the court gave defendant credit in case No. 14-CF-1453.)
¶ 5 On August 21, 2015, the State filed a petition to revoke defendant's probation, and defendant was again jailed. The court granted the petition. On October 16, 2015, it resentenced him to 4½ years' imprisonment in case No. 14-CF-1453 and unsatisfactorily terminated his
probation in case No. 14-CF-2891. The clerk's office calculated a total of $3,591 in fines and fees in case No. 14-CF-1453 and a total of $950 in fines and fees in case No. 14-CF-2891. It credited $242.38 against defendant's fines in each case. After the court denied defendant's postsentencing motion, he timely appealed.
¶ 6 II. ANALYSIS
¶ 7 In this appeal, defendant seeks the following relief:
(1) A reduction of his $50-a-month probation fees (see 730 ILCS 5/5-6-3(i) (West 2014)) by "at least $1,240" in case No. 14-CF-1435; he argues that he was on active probation for only 100 days and that he should pay fees only for the four months in which those 100 days fell.
(2) Vacatur of a $125 probation transfer fee case No. 14-CF-1435 (see 730 ILCS 5/5-9-1.13 (West 2014)) on the basis that he never sought such transfer.
(3) Credit of "an additional $285 in each case," resulting in "a grand total of $570 in $5-per-day credit."
Defendant asserts that the clerk failed to apply the credit against five types of fine in each case:
(1) $50 for " 'County,' " which defendant identifies as the "court-system" fine (55 ILCS 5/5-1101(c)(1) (West 2014));
(2) $200 for " 'Dom Viol Shelter Ser,' " which defendant identifies as the "domestic-violence fine" (730 ILCS 5/5-9-1.5 (West 2014));
(3) $15 for " 'St Police Operation,' " which defendant identifies as the "operations-assistance" fine (705 ILCS 105/27.3a(1.5), (5) (West 2014));
(4) $10 for " 'State Police Service,' " which defendant identifies as the "police-services" fine and a "portion of the juvenile expungement fine" (730 ILCS 5/5-9-1.17(b) (2014)); and
(5) $10 of the $40 charge for " 'States [sic] Attorney,' " which defendant identifies as the "states-attorney [sic]" fine, "which is also a portion of the juvenile expungement fine" (730 ILCS 5/5-9-1.17(b) (West 2014)).
The State agrees that, in case No. 14-CF-1435, defendant is entitled to have us reduce the probation fees to $200 and to have us vacate the $125 transfer fee. It further agrees that the fines listed above all are ones against which the clerk must apply any available portions of the $5-a-day credit. However, citing People v. Dale, 137 Ill. App. 3d 101, 107 (1985), it asserts that the credit "is to be applied only once."
¶ 8 We agree with the parties on the uncontested points, and we need not address them further. On his entitlement to credits, we agree with defendant. The Dale court held that fairness requires that a defendant be entitled to have the $5 earned on a specific day applied no more than once, regardless of the number of cases in which he or she has fines. Dale, 137 Ill. App. 3d at 107. In other words, regardless of the number of cases, a defendant cannot earn more than $5 in credit on one day. Thus, despite what the court orders of May 26, 2015, could be read to suggest, defendant was in presentencing custody for a total of 288 days; he is therefore entitled to credit for no more than 288 days total during his initial period of incarceration. However, that implies a maximum permissible credit (288 x $5 per day) of $1,440 for that period of incarceration, which is by itself sufficient to permit the credits that defendant seeks. (The clerk recognized one credit of $242.38 in each of the two cases; defendant seeks another credit of $285 in each case, for a total credit of $527.38 in each case, or $1,054.76 overall.) We thus can follow
the rule in Dale—applying each day's $5 credit no more than once—and apply the proper credit (up to $1,440) to the fines listed in both cases; thus we nevertheless grant all the credit that defendant seeks.
¶ 9 III. CONCLUSION
¶ 10 For the reasons stated, we modify the sentence in case No. 14-CF-1435 by reducing defendant's $50-a-month probation fees to $200 and vacating his $125 probation transfer fee. We further apply a credit in each case of up to $527.38, inclusive of credit already given, toward satisfying defendant's fines, including the "court-system" fines, the "domestic-violence" fines, the "operations-assistance" fines, the "police-services" portion of the juvenile expungement fines, and the "states-attorney" portions of the juvenile expungement fines, all credits to come from defendant's $5-a-day credit for presentencing incarceration.
¶ 11 Affirmed as modified.