Vincent G. Rinn Law Library

Seven Years Of Work By CLEAR Commission Rings In "Criminal Code of 2012"

The CLEAR Commission has been meeting since early 2005 in an intensive process to review and reform the Illinois Criminal Code and Code of Corrections to make them more readable, understandable, consistent and just. The 22 person Commission includes respected policy makers and practitioners representing diverse perspectives on the criminal justice system, as well as the geographic, racial and economic composition of the state. DePaul  Emeritus Professor of Law, John F. Decker,  is Special Advisor to the Criminal Law Edit, Alignment and Reform (CLEAR) Initiative.

Over the years, cumulative piecemeal changes have resulted in a confusing collection of laws that do not serve the needs of police,prosecutors, judges or the accused.  Some sections had actually been ruled unconstitutional. Others had confusing language with many redundancies and inconsistencies that sorely needed to be streamlined and put into a  logical organization.

Benefits of a less complex Illinois Criminal Code will include :

•  The Code will be more accessible to laypeople trying to obey the law.
•  Judges and lawyers will find the code easier to understand and apply.
•  It  will eliminate disputes over interpretation of the Code that can reduce costly retrials, court delays and mistakes.
•  The size of the Code will be reduced significantly. and indexing will be improved.
•  Policy makers will more easily understand the implications of amendments proposed in the future.
•  The new Code will limit the opportunity for lengthy and expensive appeals due to confusion with the existing Code.

The changes the commission has recommended have to be implemented by legislation by the General Assembly.  A  series of bills have been approved by the General Assembly.  Some of the previous bills passed by the legislature are listed on the CLEAR  Commission web page.

According to a May 31, Chicago Daily Law Bulletin article, what should be the final two bills of the multi-year revision process, are ready for Governor Quinn's signature. One of those bills officially changes the name of Illinois Criminal Code to the"Criminal Code of 2012". ("CLEAR bills head to Quinn", Josh Weinhold p.1 )

As a way to maintain the hard-earned order of the new code, the Commission has established a compliance subcommittee that will review bills that call for penalty enhancements or create new crimes. Also the 18-member Sentencing Policy Advisory Committee, will  "...study the states sentencing practices and offer objective policy recommendations to improve the system."

Senator Kirk Dillard, R - Hinsdale, is quoted in the article saying that   ‘A lot has changed in the criminals'  minds and techologý since 1961,”  “So to have a Criminal Code of 2012 a least shows legislators and  practitioners, decades from now, that we did  something to modernize our efforts to combat crime in Illinois."

 

Illinois Legislature Closes Jail House Door On Burge Torture Victims

Last September, the criminal case of  Illnois v. Wrice went to the Illinois Supreme Court. The  Court concluded that "... use of a defendant’s physically coerced confession as substantive evidence of his guilt is never harmless error." ( Distinguishing its ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. 279 (1991)

In regards to the petitioner, Stanley Wrice, the court  reversed the trial court’s order denying defendant leave to file his second successive postconviction petition and remanded to the trial court for appointment of postconviction counsel and second-stage postconviction proceedings.

While a few persons, like Mr. Wrice, who were convicted with torture-induced confessions, have been released by the efforts of attorneys pursuing their own cases. Many still languish in prison without any formal means to challenge their convictions with the new evidence that has accumulated over time. A  number of other men with credible torture claims are still in prison without having had a full and fair hearing into their allegations that they were tortured.

An amicus brief  filed in the Wrice case, was signed by four DePaul law faculty along with 60+ other signers, including several former state and federal judges and prosecutors, and dozens of  lawyers, legislators and legal scholars.

An additional objective of the amicus brief  was to have the Illinois Supreme Court,  not only rule on the harmless error question,  but to take the unusual step of using its " supervisory authority" to provide judicial remedies for those who claimed to have been convicted with evidence obtained under torture.The brief advocated that  "The Court should exercise its constitutional supervisory powers." "...The Court has repeatedly noted that its supervisory authority is a sweeping power, constrained only by the exigencies that summon forth its use..."

The brief requested  the Court to direct the Special Prosecutor (with input from the Illinois Torture Inquiry and Relief Commission ) to identify each case in which a currently incarcerated prisoner of the State of Illinois claims that he confessed under torture or physical abuse by Jon Burge and direct Circuit Court of Cook County to conduct evidentiary hearings in each case to determine whether the prisoner’ s conviction rests in whole or in part on a confession that was coerced.

The Court did not chose to use of its supervisory power in this way, as the brief signers had hoped. This left the incarcerated men with only the legislatively created,  Illinois Torture Inquiry and Relief Commission, as their only remaining legal option for a re-examination of their claims that they were convicted on the basis of evidence under torture which the Court had recognized as never being "harmless error".

The  Illinois legislature had mandated  a procedure to provide such an option, through the creation of the  Illinois Torture Inquiry and Relief Commission. The Governor signed the bill in August 2009. DePaul law Professor Leonard Cavise has been named to the eight member Commission.

Now this avenue of appeal appears to be foreclosed for the remaining defendants. The state House and Senate voted last week to eliminate the funding for the commission, as a result it will go out of business June 30. Although the law that gave the commission its existence will remain on the books. The eight commission members were working for free and much of the commission's work was contributed pro bono by five private law firms. So the only expense for the state was mostly the salaries of the executive director and a secretary.

While the state is in fairly desparate finacial straits, the eliminated  funding for the Commission  is a tiny part of the budget. The previous underfunding and now its complete elimination implies that legislators are unwillining to follow through on correcting the injustice that continues to exist and undermines public confidence in the Illinois legal system. 

Since the Commission still exists in law and Commission members have been appointed, one would hope that the legislature and the Governor will eventually  show some steadfastness in correcting a serious wrong by re-funding the Commission to do its appointed work.