People v. Lewis
This text of 961 N.E.2d 1237 (People v. Lewis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Court of Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Matthew A. LEWIS, Defendant-Appellant.
The People of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Matthew A. Lewis, Defendant-Appellant.
Appellate Court of Illinois, Fifth District.
Michael A. Fiello, Diane M. Goffinet, Land of Lincoln Legal Assistance Foundation, Inc., Carbondale, IL, for Appellant.
Michael Wepsiec, State's Attorney, Jackson County Courthouse, Murphysboro, IL; Patrick Delfino, Director, Stephen E. Norris, Deputy Director, Sharon Shanahan, Staff Attorney, Office of the State's Attorneys Appellate Prosecutor, Fifth District Office, Mt. Vernon, IL, for the People.
No brief filed for the City of Carbondale.
Paul E. Haidle, Cabrini Green Legal Aid, Chicago, IL, for amicus curiae.
OPINION
Justice SPOMER delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion.
¶ 1 These cases come to us on interlocutory appeal, pursuant to Illinois Supreme Court Rule 308(a) (eff.Feb. 26, 2010), from the circuit court of Jackson County, which certified the following question for our review: whether fee and cost waiver certifications, filed pursuant to section 5-105.5(b) of the Code of Civil Procedure (Code) (735 ILCS 5/5-105.5(b) (West 2010)), are sufficient to waive fees for the filing of petitions for expungement. For the following reasons, we answer the certified question *1238 in the affirmative, reverse the April 26, 2011, orders, vacate the June 27, 2011, orders, and remand with directions to enter orders allowing the fee waivers in their entirety, pursuant to section 5-105.5(b) of the Code.
¶ 2 FACTS
¶ 3 On April 26, 2011, counsel from Land of Lincoln Legal Assistance Foundation, Inc., entered an appearance on behalf of the defendant in the circuit court of Jackson County, in expungement proceedings in the underlying cases, and filed fee and cost waiver certifications, pursuant to section 5-105.5(b) of the Code (735 ILCS 5/5-105.5(b) (West 2010)).[1] That same date, the circuit court entered orders by docket entries, denying the waivers and elaborating that fees are not waived in expungement proceedings. Counsel for the defendant filed motions to reconsider on May 24, 2011, which were denied by docket entries the following day. In denying the motions, the circuit court stated that expungement proceedings are not purely civil, but quasi-criminal or corollary to criminal proceedings, to which the cited statute is not applicable.
¶ 4 On June 20, 2011, at the request of the defendant, the circuit court entered orders certifying the question at hand for interlocutory appeal, pursuant to Illinois Supreme Court Rule 308(a) (eff.Feb.26, 2010). In certifying the question, the circuit court noted that because it found section 5-105.5(b) of the Code to be inapplicable, it required the defendant to file applications and supporting affidavits for leave to sue or defend as an indigent person, as provided in section 5-105 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/5-105 (West 2010)) and Illinois Supreme Court Rule 298 (eff. Nov.1, 2003). On June 22, 2011, the defendant filed these documents. On June 27, 2011, the circuit court entered orders allowing the defendant's section 5-105 applications to the extent of reducing the fees to $75 in each of the underlying cases.
¶ 5 ANALYSIS
¶ 6 "The scope of review in an interlocutory appeal under Rule 308 is ordinarily limited to the question certified by the trial court, which, because it must be a question of law, is reviewed de novo." Hudkins v. Egan, 364 Ill.App.3d 587, 590, 301 Ill.Dec. 486, 847 N.E.2d 145 (2006). The certified question on appeal is whether fee and cost waiver certifications, filed pursuant to section 5-105.5(b) of the Code (735 ILCS 5/5-105.5(b) (West 2010)), are sufficient to waive fees for the filing of petitions for expungement. We begin by noting that the language of section 5.2(d) of the Criminal Identification Act, under which the defendant filed his petition to expunge, provides, "The petitioner shall pay the applicable fee, if not waived." 20 ILCS 2630/5.2(d)(1) (West 2010). Accordingly, the legislature contemplated scenarios where fees for expungement would be waived.
¶ 7 We turn now to the relevant statutory language. Section 5-105.5(b) of the Code provides that "all fees and costs relating to filing, appearing, transcripts on *1239 appeal, and service of process shall be waived without the necessity of a motion for that purpose," so long as the party "is represented in a civil action by a civil legal services provider." 735 ILCS 5/5-105.5(b) (West 2010). "We note that section 5-105.5(b) does not require plaintiffs or their counsel to submit `evidence' in support of their fee waiver claim." Rodriguez v. Hushka, 325 Ill.App.3d 329, 333, 259 Ill. Dec. 63, 757 N.E.2d 926 (2001). Rather, all that is required for the waiver of fees under this section is that the legal services provider, in a civil action, file a certification that a determination has been made that the party is indigent, "along with the complaint, the appearance, or any other paper that would otherwise require payment of a fee." 735 ILCS 5/5-105.5(b) (West 2010).
¶ 8 In the case at bar, the defendant was represented by a legal services provider who provided all of the required documentation under section 5-105.5(b). Accordingly, the crux of the certified question on appeal is the determination of whether expungement proceedings are "civil actions," as required by that section. The State insists that the circuit court properly denied the fee waivers under section 5-105.5(b) because expungement proceedings are not civil, but criminal matters, corollary to underlying criminal proceedings. To the contrary, the defendant argues that the fee waivers should have been automatically granted because expungement proceedings are civil and the requirements of section 5-105.5(b) were met. We agree with the defendant.
¶ 9 As aptly noted in the defendant's brief, an expungement case has none of the characteristics of a criminal case or a quasi-criminal case. A criminal case is brought by the State pursuant to the provisions of the Illinois Criminal Code of 1961 (720 ILCS 5/1-1 et seq. (West 2010)) or by a municipality for violations of the Illinois Municipal Code (65 ILCS 5/1-1-1 et seq. (West 2010)). Criminal cases are prosecuted by the appropriate authorities, usually the Attorney General for the State (15 ILCS 205/4 (West 2010)), the State's Attorney (55 ILCS 5/3-9005 (West 2010)), or the city attorney (65 ILCS 5/1-2-1.1 (West 2010)). The possible outcomes are a conviction after trial (720 ILCS 5/2-5
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
961 N.E.2d 1237, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-lewis-illappct-2011.