Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

People v. Rupert

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided October 7, 1986No. 3-86-0013Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice Barry

I agree with my colleagues that the circuit court’s order of restitution cannot stand in its present form since monthly payments of $200 will not result in the restitution of $12,730.46 within the period permitted by the sentencing court’s order. Obviously, the sentencing order must be corrected. I part company with my colleagues’ disposition of the appeal thereafter.

The circuit court is in the proper position to determine the appropriate sentence to be imposed upon a convicted defendant. (People v. Edwards (1985), 135 Ill. App. 3d 671, 482 N.E.2d 137.) It is a rare exception, rather than the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. People v. La PointeIllinois Supreme Court · 1982
  2. People v. TidwellAppellate Court of Illinois · 1975
  3. People v. YoungerIllinois Supreme Court · 1986
  4. People v. EdwardsAppellate Court of Illinois · 1985

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API