matter for an evidentiary hearing in Illinois

2021In support of this request, defendant cites People v. Fellers, 2016 IL App (4th) 140486 . ¶ 47 In Fellers, the court found that the record before it was not sufficient to make a determination on direct appeal concerning whether trial counsel was ineffective in failing to file a motion to suppress.

2020In support of this request, defendant cites People v. Fellers, 2016 IL App (4th) 140486 . ¶ 47 In Fellers, the court found that the record before it was not sufficient to make a determination on direct appeal concerning whether trial counsel was ineffective in failing to file a motion to suppress.

2020See People v. Vega, 2018 IL App (1st) 160619, ¶ 52 (“An as-applied constitutional challenge is a legal question that we review de novo.”). ¶ 53 Accordingly, we decline to remand this matter for an evidentiary hearing. ¶ 54 CONCLUSION ¶ 55 Based on the foregoing, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. ¶ 56 Affirmed. 7 See, e.g., Harris, 2018 IL 121932, ¶ 38 (stating that a “party raising a facial challenge must establish that the statute is unconstitutional under any possible set of facts”). - 16 - No. 1-17-0310 No. 1-17-0310 Cite as: People v. Thomas, 2020 IL App (1st) 170310 Decision Unde

2020Accordingly, we decline to remand this matter for an evidentiary hearing. ¶ 52 CONCLUSION ¶ 53 Based on the foregoing, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. ¶ 54 Affirmed. 7 See, e.g., Harris, 2018 IL 121932, ¶ 38 (stating that a “party raising a facial challenge must establish that the statute is unconstitutional under any possible set of facts”). - 16 - No. 1-17-0310 No. 1-17-0310 Cite as: People v. Thomas, 2020 IL App (1st) 170310 Decision Under Review: Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County, No. 11-CR-08111- 02; the Hon.

2018On appeal, they raise only one claim: that plaintiff failed to send them a grace period notice as required by section 15-1502.5 of the Illinois Mortgage Foreclosure Law (Foreclosure Law) (735 ILCS 5/15-1502.5 (West 2012)).1 It is for this reason alone that they request this court reverse the judgment of the circuit court and remand the matter for an evidentiary hearing in compliance with Bank of America, N.A. v. Adeyiga, 2014 IL App (1st) 131252 .

2017On appeal, they raise only one claim: that plaintiff failed to send them a grace period notice as required by section 15-1502.5 of the Illinois Mortgage Foreclosure Law (Foreclosure Law) ( 735 ILCS 5/15-1502.5 (West 2012) ). 1 It is for this *401 reason alone that they request this court reverse the judgment of the circuit court and remand the matter for an evidentiary hearing in compliance with Bank of America, N.A. v. Adeyiga , 2014 IL App (1st) 131252 , 390 Ill.Dec. 431 , 29 N.E.3d 60 .

2008App. 3d 102 , 109 , 830 N.E.2d 731 (2005), where this court reversed the dismissal of the defendant's postconviction petition and remanded the matter for an evidentiary hearing.

2008App. 3d 102, 109 , 830 N.E.2d 731 (2005), where this court reversed the dismissal of the defendant’s postconviction petition and remanded the matter for an evidentiary hearing.

2001BACKGROUND The testimony presented at trial was recounted by this court in Wiley II, 165 Ill. 2d at 267-71 , and we will detail here only those facts relevant to our resolution of this appeal.

2001BACKGROUND The testimony presented at trial was recounted by this court in Wiley II, 165 Ill.2d at 267-71 , 209 Ill.Dec. 261 , 651 N.E.2d 189 , and we will detail here only those facts relevant to our resolution of this appeal.

2000Thompkins, 161 Ill.2d at 166-67 , 204 Ill.Dec. 147 , 641 N.E.2d 371 .

2000Thompkins, 161 Ill. 2d at 166-67 .

1997Olinger, 176 Ill. 2d at 352 .

1997Olinger , 176 Ill. 2d at 352 .

2024People v. Johnson, 2019 IL App (1st) 153204 (Mason, J., dissenting).

2024CONCLUSION ¶ 157 For the foregoing reasons, we reverse the judgment of the circuit court and remand this matter for an evidentiary hearing under the Act. ¶ 158 Reversed and remanded. - 57 - No. 1-22-0419 People v. Johnson, 2024 IL App (1st) 220419 Decision Under Review: Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County, No. 03-CR-5227; the Hon.

2022The court declined to remand the matter for an evidentiary hearing but noted that the defendant could pursue his claim either in a postconviction petition or in a proceeding pursuant to section 2-1401 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-1401 (West 2016)). [Citation].” Figueroa, 2020 IL App (2d) 160650, ¶ 86 . ¶ 89 In the present case, the defendant did not raise his as-applied challenge before the trial court.

2022Under the American Rule, “absent statutory authority or a contractual agreement, each party must bear its own attorney fees and costs.” Uncle Tom’s, Inc. v. Lynn Plaza, LLC, 2021 IL App (1st) 200205 , ¶ 72.

2022As the court in Harris emphasized, “a reviewing court is not capable of making an as-applied finding of unconstitutionality in the ‘factual vacuum’ created by the absence of an evidentiary hearing and findings of fact by the trial court.” Id. (quoting People v. Minnis, 2016 IL 119563, ¶ 19 ). ¶ 84 The Harris court ultimately declined to remand the matter for an evidentiary hearing, finding that because the defendant failed to raise his as-applied challenge in the trial court, 23 No. 1-19-1087 therefore depriving the trial court the opportunity to make any findings of fact on the defendant’s sp

2021Defendant also asserts that, in the alternative, we should remand this matter for an evidentiary hearing for the trial court to determine whether the mandatory minimum sentence of 45 years in this matter is unconstitutional under Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012), where defendant was 22 years old at the time of the offense. ¶4 I.

2017On appeal, they raise only one claim: that plaintiff failed to send them a grace period notice as required by section 15-1502.5 of the Illinois Mortgage Foreclosure Law (Foreclosure Law) ( 735 ILCS 5/15-1502.5 (West 2012) ). 1 It is for this *401 reason alone that they request this court reverse the judgment of the circuit court and remand the matter for an evidentiary hearing in compliance with Bank of America, N.A. v. Adeyiga , 2014 IL App (1st) 131252 , 390 Ill.Dec. 431 , 29 N.E.3d 60 .

2002The post-conviction exhibits cited by the majority in support of its decision to remand this matter for an evidentiary hearing (see 206 Ill.2d at 323 , 276 Ill.Dec. at 305 , 794 N.E.2d at 200 ) serve only to confirm this conclusion.

2002The post-conviction exhibits cited by the majority in support of its decision to remand this matter for an evidentiary hearing (see 206 Ill.2d at 323 , 276 Ill.Dec. at 305 , 794 N.E.2d at 200 ) serve only to confirm this conclusion.