People v. Jordan12/8/2004
defendant guilty of endangering the life and health of a child and sentenced him to three months' court supervision. Defendant timely appeals.
ANALYSIS
Defendant contends that section 12-21.6(b) of the child endangerment statute (720 ILCS 5/12-21.6(b) (West 2002)) is unconstitutional and violates the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment to the United States Constitution (U.S. Const., amend.XIV) because it contains a mandatory presumption that relieves the State of its burden to prove the element of intent beyond a reasonable doubt.
Section 12-21.6 reads:
"(a) It is unlawful for any person to willfully cause or permit the life or health of a child under the age of 18 to be endangered or to willfully cause or permit a child to be placed in circumstances that endanger the child's life or health, except that it is not unlawful for a person to relinquish a child in accordance with the Abandoned Newborn Infant Protection Act.
(b) There is a rebuttable presumption that a person committed the offense if he or she left a child 6 years of age or younger unattended in a motor vehicle for more than 10 minutes." 720 ILCS 5/12-21.6(a), (b) (West 2002).
The constitutionality of a statute is subject to de novo review. People v. Malchow, 193 Ill.2d 413, 418, 739 N.E.2d 433 (2000). Statutes carry a strong presumption of constitutionality and the party challenging the statute bears the burden of rebutting that presumption. People v. Maness, 191 Ill.2d 478, 483, 732 N.E.2d 545 (2000). This court has a duty to interpret a statute in a manner that upholds its validity and constitutionality if it can be reasonably done. People v. Fisher, 184 Ill.2d 441, 448, 705 N.E .2d 67 (1998).
The due process clause of the fourteenth amendment of the United States Constitution requires the State to prove every element of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 316, 61 L.Ed.2d 560, 571, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 2787(1979). The State may, in certain circumstances, rely on presumptions and inferences in establishing a defendant's guilt. County Court of Ulster County v. Allen, 442 U.S. 140, 156, 60 L.Ed.2d 777, 791, 99 S.Ct. 2213, 2224 (1979). A presumption is a legal device that either permits or requires the fact finder to assume the existence of an ultimate fact, after basic or predicate facts have been established. People v. Pomykala, 203 Ill.2d 198, 203, 784 N.E.2d 784, 787 (2003). Presumptions may be permissive or mandatory. People v. Watts, 181 Ill.2d 133, 142, 692 N.E.2d 315 (1998). Mandatory presumptions may be further classified as rebuttable or irrebuttable. Pomykala, 203 Ill.2d at 203, 784 N.E.2d at 787. A permissive presumption is one where the fact finder is free to infer the existence of the ultimate or presumed fact upon proof of the predicate fact. Pomykala, 203 Ill.2d at 203, 784 N.E.2d at 787. A mandatory presumption is one in which the fact finder is required to accept the presumption. Watts, 181 Ill.2d at 142.
The United States Supreme Court has held that mandatory conclusive presumptions do not pass constitutional muster because such presumptions directly conflict with the presumption of innocence. Sandstrom v. Montana, 442 U.S. 510, 523, 61 L.Ed.3d 39, 50, 99 S.Ct. 2450, 2459 (1979). Likewise, the Supreme Court has held that mandatory rebuttable presumptions that shift the burden of persuasion to the defendant are per se unconstitutional as they alleviate the State's burden to prove every element of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Sandstrom, 442 U.S. at 524, 61 L.Ed.2d at 51, 99 S.Ct. at 2459. Our supreme court has subsequently held that mandatory rebuttable presumptions that shift the burden of production to the defendant are also unconstitutional. Watts, 181 Ill.2d at 147. Consequently, under Illinois
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Illinois DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|