* Background is ubiquitous, so use the Google. Definition of Nolle Prosequi according to the Law Dictionary…
Lat. In practice. A formal entry upon the record, by the plaintiff in a civil suit or the prosecuting officer in a criminal action, by which he declares that he “will no further prosecute” the case, either as to some of the counts, or some of the defendants, or altogether. A nolle prosequi is in the nature of an acknowledgment or undertaking by the plaintiff in an action to forbear to proceed any further either in the action altogether, or as to some part of it, or as to some of the defendants; and is different from a non- pros., by which the plaintiff is put out of court with respect to all the defendants.
* And now on to People v. Smollett. Illinois Supreme Court’s Justice Rochford with the opinion concurred by four justices, with two others (Chief Justice Theis and Justice Cunningham) not participating…
“The public justifiably expects the State, above all others, to keep its bond.” - Bowers v. State, 500 N.E.2d 203, 204 (Ind. 1986).
Today we resolve a question about the State’s responsibility to honor the agreements it makes with defendants. Specifically, we address whether a dismissal of a case by nolle prosequi allows the State to bring a second prosecution when the dismissal was entered as part of an agreement with the defendant and the defendant has performed his part of the bargain. We hold that a second prosecution under these circumstances is a due process violation, and we therefore reverse defendant’s conviction. […]
That the parties intended finality is also supported by page after page of the [Office of the Special Prosecutor’s] summary report. There is no indication anywhere in the report that the [Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office] intended to further prosecute defendant, and there is every indication that the CCSAO considered the case resolved. […]
Defendant argues that he entered into a nonprosecution agreement with the State, that he fully performed his part of the agreement, and that therefore any further prosecution of him was barred. […]
We agree with Justice Lyle that the assistant state’s attorney’s statement on March 26, 2019, clearly showed that the parties intended finality. Again, the assistant state’s attorney stated that this outcome was a “just disposition and appropriate resolution to this case.” This is not the statement of someone who intends to refile the charges. […]
Because the charges were dismissed in exchange for defendant’s community service and forfeiture of his bail bond and because defendant fully performed his end of the agreement, the State is bound by the agreement. […]
Illinois case law establishes that it is fundamentally unfair to allow the prosecution to renege on a deal with a defendant when the defendant has relied on the agreement to his detriment. […]
The proper prosecutor rule exists to protect defendants, not to allow the State to take advantage of its own errors to get a do-over.
* Conclusion…
We are aware that this case has generated significant public interest and that many people were dissatisfied with the resolution of the original case and believed it to be unjust. Nevertheless, what would be more unjust than the resolution of any one criminal case would be a holding from this court that the State was not bound to honor agreements upon which people have detrimentally relied. As the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania recently stated when enforcing a prosecutorial promise not to prosecute:
“It cannot be gainsaid that society holds a strong interest in the prosecution of crimes. It is also true that no such interest, however important, ever can eclipse society’s interest in ensuring that the constitutional rights of the people are vindicated. Society’s interest in prosecution does not displace the remedy due to constitutionally aggrieved persons.” Cosby, 252 A.2d at 1147.
That court further noted the consequences of failing to enforce prosecutorial promises when a defendant has relied on them to his detriment:
“A contrary result would be patently untenable. It would violate long-cherished principles of fundamental fairness. It would be antithetical to, and corrosive of, the integrity and functionality of the criminal justice system that we strive to maintain.”
We reverse the judgment of the appellate court, reverse the judgment of the circuit court, and remand the cause with directions for the circuit court to enter a judgment of dismissal.
- Three Dimensional Checkers - Thursday, Nov 21, 24 @ 10:44 am:
I think the Court got it right, but Smollett is still awful. All people, not just dirtbag, B-list actors, should have the same due process rights as well.
- Norseman - Thursday, Nov 21, 24 @ 10:50 am:
Yes, the IL Supreme Court gets it, a deal’s a deal - said Hunter.
- Not So Innocent Bystander - Thursday, Nov 21, 24 @ 10:58 am:
The decision is clearly correct, but why did it take so long? Dan Webb should have recognized the significance of the non-prosecution deal years ago. But the true fault here lies with Kim Foxx and her minions. This miscarriage of justice is entirely her responsibility and will serve as her lasting legacy. Good riddance!
- Larry Bowa Jr. - Thursday, Nov 21, 24 @ 10:58 am:
They’re outraged in Edison Park and Mt. Greenwood today. That’s why the state Supreme Court feels the need to acknowledge “the public interest,” i.e. LE’s precious feelings about the case in this legal decision.
- Amalia - Thursday, Nov 21, 24 @ 11:07 am:
ok, new decision, but the entire matter exposed the ridiculous conduct of the current SAO administration. Less than one month to go.
- Donnie Elgin - Thursday, Nov 21, 24 @ 11:20 am:
It seems like the correct legal ruling; however, it is a shame that it offers cover for SA Fox and the office of Cook County state’s attorney who IMHO did not act in good faith from the start.
- Three Dimensional Checkers - Thursday, Nov 21, 24 @ 11:21 am:
===They’re outraged in Edison Park and Mt. Greenwood today.===
Why is the Democratic Party losing ground in
Chicago? It is such a mystery.
- Big Dipper - Thursday, Nov 21, 24 @ 11:49 am:
No one thinks Cosby was innocent and no one thinks Smollett was innocent. So there is some punishment regardless of whether they are in prison. I also agree with the comment about Webb. The same cases that the court relied on he should have read and understood. Sometimes people coast on their reputation.
- Friendly Bob Adams - Thursday, Nov 21, 24 @ 12:07 pm:
Anyone want to expound on why two particular areas of Chicago (Edison Park and Mt. Greenwood) would be especially outraged compared to other areas??
- Homebody - Thursday, Nov 21, 24 @ 12:08 pm:
1. I think the court got this one right.
2. I think Smollett is a slimeball.
3. I think Foxx messed this up massively.
4. I think the people who keep harping on Smollett are likely racially motivated.
5. I think it is absolutely appropriate to keep harping on Foxx’s behavior though.
- Bud's Bar Stool - Thursday, Nov 21, 24 @ 12:16 pm:
=== Anyone want to expound on why two particular areas of Chicago (Edison Park and Mt. Greenwood) would be especially outraged compared to other areas?? ===
That’s where the cop residences are concentrated.
- smile politely - Thursday, Nov 21, 24 @ 12:17 pm:
I think that this is Cook County justice
I think the Obama’s finger prints are all over this.
I think that if this was an ordinary non clouted person they would be in jail
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Nov 21, 24 @ 12:40 pm:
===I think that if this was an ordinary non clouted person they would be in jail===
How many people are in jail for filing false police reports?
- Jerry - Thursday, Nov 21, 24 @ 1:02 pm:
Well played, Rich.
- Larry Bowa Jr. - Thursday, Nov 21, 24 @ 1:03 pm:
“Why is the Democratic Party losing ground in
Chicago? It is such a mystery.”
LOL. I don’t live in Chicago and I’m not a member of the democratic party.
Happy to be your boogeyman though, with my scary lack of admiration for CPD.
- Pundent - Thursday, Nov 21, 24 @ 1:40 pm:
=I think that if this was an ordinary non clouted person they would be in jail.=
The original plea was the correct outcome. The “do over” was a function of the defendant’s notoriety and publicity surrounding the event. And the defendant isn’t being exonerated, he’s simply being judged according to the same standard that would be applied to anyone else in this circumstance.
- allknowingmasterofraccoondom - Thursday, Nov 21, 24 @ 2:48 pm:
The “do over” would have never happened if Jesse didn’t go all over the airwaves after signing a plea deal spouting horrible things about CPD, Chicago, Chicago residents, and Cook County courts. The dude never knows when to keep his mouth shut. I predict he starts again…..and if he does I hope they go for X3, this time for perjury.
- smile politely - Thursday, Nov 21, 24 @ 3:22 pm:
Rich
Google is your and mine, friend.
https://www.chicagotribune.com/2019/05/17/judge-defense-attorney-question-why-woman-charged-with-filing-false-police-report-isnt-being-treated-like-actor-jussie-smollett/
Have a great day and remember to Smile Politely
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Nov 21, 24 @ 3:32 pm:
smile politely, one anecdote is not data.