person raising challenge in Illinois

2025Our supreme court has stated that “ ‘ “[a] court is not capable of making an ‘as applied’ determination of unconstitutionality when there has been no evidentiary hearing and no findings of fact. [Citation.] Without an evidentiary record, any finding that a statute is unconstitutional ‘as applied’ is premature.” ’ ” Rizzo, 2016 IL 118599, ¶ 26 (quoting People v. Mosley, 2015 IL 115872, ¶ 47 , quoting John M., 212 Ill. 2d at 268 ).

2020As observed by our supreme court: “ ‘ “A court is not capable of making an ‘as applied’ determination of unconstitutionality when there has been no evidentiary hearing and no findings of fact. [Citation.] Without an evidentiary record, any finding that a statute is unconstitutional ‘as applied’ is premature.” ’ ” Rizzo, 2016 IL 118599, ¶ 26 (quoting People v. Mosley, 2015 IL 115872 , ¶ 47, quoting In re Parentage of John M., 212 Ill. 2d 253, 268 (2004)). ¶ 42 We find our supreme court’s recent decision in People v. Harris, 2018 IL 121932 , to be instructive.

2025“Because as-applied constitutional challenges are, by definition, dependent on the specific facts and circumstances of the person raising the challenge, it is paramount that the record be sufficiently developed in terms of those facts and circumstances for purposes of appellate review.” Id. ¶ 17 (citing People v. Harris, 2018 IL 121932, ¶ 39 ).

2020“All as-applied constitutional challenges are, by definition, dependent on the specific facts and circumstances of the person raising the challenge.” Harris, 2018 IL 121932, ¶ 39 . “ ‘ “A court is not capable of making an ‘as applied’ determination of unconstitutionality when there has been no evidentiary hearing and no findings of fact. [Citation.] Without an evidentiary record, any finding that a statute is unconstitutional ‘as applied’ is premature.” ’ ” Id. (quoting People v. Rizzo, 2016 IL 118599, ¶ 26 , quoting People v. Mosley, 2015 IL 115872, ¶ 47 ). ¶ 33 In the instant case, defendant

2024Because “[a]ll as-applied constitutional challenges are, by definition, dependent on the specific facts and circumstances of the person raising the challenge,” it is “paramount that the record be sufficiently developed in terms of those facts and circumstances for purposes of appellate review.” (Internal quotations omitted.) Harris, 2018 IL 121932, ¶ 39 (citing People v. Hartrich, 2018 IL 121636, ¶ 31 ); see also House, 2021 IL 125124 (reversing and remanding for further proceedings because the record regarding the young adult defendant’s immaturity was not fully developed). “ ‘A defendant who

2021“A party raising a facial challenge must establish that the statute is unconstitutional under any possible facts, while an as-applied challenge requires a showing that the statute is unconstitutional as it applies to the specific facts and circumstances of the challenging party. [Citations.] All as- applied constitutional challenges are, by definition, dependent on the specific facts and circumstances of the person raising the challenge.” Id. ¶¶ 38-39. “ ‘Therefore, it is paramount that the record be sufficiently developed in terms of those facts and circumstances for purposes of appellate rev

2026“Because - 18 - as-applied constitutional challenges are, by definition, dependent on the specific facts and circumstances of the person raising the challenge, it is paramount that the record be sufficiently developed in terms of those facts and circumstances for purposes of appellate review.” People v. Burns, 2024 IL App (4th) 230428, ¶ 7 (citing People v. Harris, 2018 IL 121932, ¶ 39 ).

2025“Because as-applied constitutional challenges are, by definition, dependent on the specific facts and circumstances of the person raising the challenge, it is paramount that the record be sufficiently developed in terms of those facts and circumstances for purposes of appellate review.” Id. ¶ 17 (citing People v. Harris, 2018 IL 121932, ¶ 39 ).

2019Coty , 2018 IL App (1st) 162383 , ¶ 69, 425 Ill.Dec. 47 , 110 N.E.3d 1105 . ¶ 43 Relying on the reasoning in Coty and the Court's holding in Graham v. Florida , 560 U.S. 48 , 82, 130 S.Ct. 2011 , 176 L.Ed.2d 825 (2010), defendant argues that the matter must be remanded so that he may be resentenced to a survivable sentence that takes his individual characteristics into account. ¶ 44 "All as-applied constitutional challenges are, by definition, dependent on the specific facts and circumstances of the person raising the challenge." People v. Harris , 2018 IL 121932 , ¶ 39, 427 Ill.Dec. 833 , 120

2019Coty , 2018 IL App (1st) 162383 , ¶ 69, 425 Ill.Dec. 47 , 110 N.E.3d 1105 . ¶ 43 Relying on the reasoning in Coty and the Court's holding in Graham v. Florida , 560 U.S. 48 , 82, 130 S.Ct. 2011 , 176 L.Ed.2d 825 (2010), defendant argues that the matter must be remanded so that he may be resentenced to a survivable sentence that takes his individual characteristics into account. ¶ 44 "All as-applied constitutional challenges are, by definition, dependent on the specific facts and circumstances of the person raising the challenge." People v. Harris , 2018 IL 121932 , ¶ 39, 427 Ill.Dec. 833 , 120

2023App. 3d 964, 966 (1973), quoting Jordan v. De George, 341 U.S. 223, 231-32 (1951)).

2022App. 3d 964, 966 (1973) (quoting Jordan v. De George, 341 U.S. 223, 231-32 (1951)).

2023“Both facial and as- applied challenges face the same considerable burden of overcoming the strong judicial presumption that the statute at issue is constitutional. [Citation.]” People v. Kelly, 2018 IL App (1st) 162334, ¶ 20 . “[A]ll as-applied constitutional challenges are, by definition, dependent on the specific facts and circumstances of the person raising the challenge.” Id. ¶ 23. ¶ 82 “A vagueness challenge is a due process challenge, examining whether a statute give[s] [a] person of ordinary intelligence a reasonable opportunity to know what is prohibited, so that he may act accordingl

2022“Both facial and as-applied challenges face the same considerable burden of overcoming the strong judicial presumption that the statute at issue is constitutional. [Citation.]” People v. Kelly, 2018 IL App (1st) 162334, ¶ 20 . “[A]ll as-applied constitutional challenges are, by definition, dependent on the specific facts and circumstances of the person raising the challenge.” Id. ¶ 23. ¶ 84 “A vagueness challenge is a due process challenge, examining whether a statute gives a person of ordinary intelligence a reasonable opportunity to know what is prohibited, so that he may act -24- 1-22-0816

2025Our supreme court has stated that “ ‘ “[a] court is not capable of making an ‘as applied’ determination of unconstitutionality when there has been no evidentiary hearing and no findings of fact. [Citation.] Without an evidentiary record, any finding that a statute is unconstitutional ‘as applied’ is premature.” ’ ” Rizzo, 2016 IL 118599, ¶ 26 (quoting People v. Mosley, 2015 IL 115872, ¶ 47 , quoting John M., 212 Ill. 2d at 268 ).

2020“All as-applied constitutional challenges are, by definition, dependent on the specific facts and circumstances of the person raising the challenge.” Harris, 2018 IL 121932, ¶ 39 . “ ‘ “A court is not capable of making an ‘as applied’ determination of unconstitutionality when there has been no evidentiary hearing and no findings of fact. [Citation.] Without an evidentiary record, any finding that a statute is unconstitutional ‘as applied’ is premature.” ’ ” Id. (quoting People v. Rizzo, 2016 IL 118599, ¶ 26 , quoting People v. Mosley, 2015 IL 115872, ¶ 47 ). ¶ 33 In the instant case, defendant

2024Because “[a]ll as-applied constitutional challenges are, by definition, dependent on the specific facts and circumstances of the person raising the challenge,” it is “paramount that the record be sufficiently developed in terms of those facts and circumstances for purposes of appellate review.” (Internal quotations omitted.) Harris, 2018 IL 121932, ¶ 39 (citing People v. Hartrich, 2018 IL 121636, ¶ 31 ); see also House, 2021 IL 125124 (reversing and remanding for further proceedings because the record regarding the young adult defendant’s immaturity was not fully developed). “ ‘A defendant who

2022Id ¶ 39. ¶ 26 In People v. House, 2021 IL 125124 , our supreme court reiterated its finding in Harris.

2023“Both facial and as- applied challenges face the same considerable burden of overcoming the strong judicial presumption that the statute at issue is constitutional. [Citation.]” People v. Kelly, 2018 IL App (1st) 162334, ¶ 20 . “[A]ll as-applied constitutional challenges are, by definition, dependent on the specific facts and circumstances of the person raising the challenge.” Id. ¶ 23. ¶ 82 “A vagueness challenge is a due process challenge, examining whether a statute give[s] [a] person of ordinary intelligence a reasonable opportunity to know what is prohibited, so that he may act accordingl

2022“Both facial and as-applied challenges face the same considerable burden of overcoming the strong judicial presumption that the statute at issue is constitutional. [Citation.]” People v. Kelly, 2018 IL App (1st) 162334, ¶ 20 . “[A]ll as-applied constitutional challenges are, by definition, dependent on the specific facts and circumstances of the person raising the challenge.” Id. ¶ 23. ¶ 84 “A vagueness challenge is a due process challenge, examining whether a statute gives a person of ordinary intelligence a reasonable opportunity to know what is prohibited, so that he may act -24- 1-22-0816

2026“Because - 18 - as-applied constitutional challenges are, by definition, dependent on the specific facts and circumstances of the person raising the challenge, it is paramount that the record be sufficiently developed in terms of those facts and circumstances for purposes of appellate review.” People v. Burns, 2024 IL App (4th) 230428, ¶ 7 (citing People v. Harris, 2018 IL 121932, ¶ 39 ).

2024See People v. Clark, 2023 IL 127273, ¶ 88 (“We need not resolve the issue of whether defendant’s age at the time of the offense, 24, would preclude him from raising a Miller-based challenge to his sentence under proportionate penalties clause standards in an initial postconviction petition.”). ¶ 59 This is so because “as-applied constitutional challenges are, by definition, dependent on the specific facts and circumstances of the person raising the challenge.” Harris, 2018 IL 121932, ¶ 39 .

2024Accordingly, while “the legislature has the power to prescribe” mandatory minimum sentences, for adults, the penalty nonetheless “must satisfy constitutional requirements,” (Hilliard, 2023 IL 128186, ¶ 21 (quoting People v. Huddleston, 212 Ill. 2d 107, 129 (2004)) and be determined “both according to the seriousness of the offense and with the objective of restoring the offender to useful citizenship.” Ill.

2024Because “[a]ll as-applied constitutional challenges are, by definition, dependent on the specific facts and circumstances of the person raising the challenge,” it is “paramount that the record be sufficiently developed in terms of those facts and circumstances for purposes of appellate review.” (Internal quotations omitted.) Harris, 2018 IL 121932, ¶ 39 (citing People v. Hartrich, 2018 IL 121636, ¶ 31 ); see also House, 2021 IL 125124 (reversing and remanding for further proceedings because the record regarding the young adult defendant’s immaturity was not fully developed). “ ‘A defendant who

2024Accordingly, while “the legislature has the power to prescribe” mandatory minimum sentences, for adults, the penalty nonetheless “must satisfy constitutional requirements,” (Hilliard, 2023 IL 128186, ¶ 21 (quoting People v. Huddleston, 212 Ill. 2d 107, 129 (2004)) and be determined “both according to the seriousness of the offense and with the objective of restoring the offender to useful citizenship.” Ill.

2024Because “[a]ll as-applied constitutional challenges are, by definition, dependent on the specific facts and circumstances of the person raising the challenge,” it is “paramount that the record be sufficiently developed in terms of those facts and circumstances for purposes of appellate review.” (Internal quotations omitted.) Harris, 2018 IL 121932, ¶ 39 (citing People v. Hartrich, 2018 IL 121636, ¶ 31 ); see also House, 2021 IL 125124 (reversing and remanding for further proceedings because the record regarding the young adult defendant’s immaturity was not fully developed). “ ‘A defendant who

2022See Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460, 479 (2012) (eighth amendment prohibits mandatory life without parole sentences for juvenile offenders convicted of homicide); Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551, 574-75 (2005) (eighth amendment prohibits death penalty for juveniles 18 who commit homicide); Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48, 82 (2010) (eighth amendment prohibits mandatory life without parole sentences for juveniles who commit nonhomicide offenses). ¶ 55 The defendant claims that his sentence shocks the moral sense of the community as the defendant did not commit murder and the defendant will not be

2022Therefore, our review of an as-applied challenge is “dependent on the specific facts and circumstances of the person raising the challenge.” People v. Harris, 2018 IL 121932 , ¶ 39. ¶ 37 “A statutory enactment, though sufficiently clear and precise to withstand a vagueness attack, may nevertheless be impermissibly overbroad if it may reasonably b[e] interpreted to prohibit conduct which is constitutionally protected.” People v. Schwartz, 64 Ill. 2d 275, 282 (1976).

2022See Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460, 479 (2012) (eighth amendment prohibits mandatory life without parole sentences for juvenile offenders convicted of homicide); Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551, 574-75 (2005) (eighth amendment prohibits death penalty for juveniles 18 who commit homicide); Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48, 82 (2010) (eighth amendment prohibits mandatory life without parole sentences for juveniles who commit nonhomicide offenses). ¶ 55 The defendant claims that his sentence shocks the moral sense of the community as the defendant did not commit murder and the defendant will not be