mitigating and aggravating factors in Illinois

2016"Absent an abuse of discretion, a trial court's sentence will not be disturbed on appeal merely because this court might have weighed the mitigating and aggravating factors differently." Id. ¶ 85 Section 5-5-3.1(a)(9) dictates that the following ground "shall be accorded weight in favor of withholding or minimizing a sentence of imprisonment": "The character and attitudes of the defendant indicate that he is unlikely to commit another crime." 730 ILCS 5/5-5-3.1(a)(9) (West 2012).

2015Id. at 512 , 849 N.E.2d at 1094 . ¶ 45 Defendant directs our attention to the (1) "circumstances surrounding" Loyer's death and (2) his character as a "hard-working member of society" as proof that extraordinary circumstances existed in this case to warrant a sentence of probation.

1992App. 3d 383 , 487 N.E.2d 662 , aff'd (1986), 115 Ill. 2d 184 , 503 N.E.2d 331 .) Prior to sentencing the defendant, the trial court made reference to the impact of the offense on the victim, deterrence, defendant’s potential for rehabilitation and defendant’s “exemplary record in public service.” It is clear from the court’s comments that it weighed and considered both the mitigating and aggravating factors, and we will not substitute our judgment for that of the trial court.

1992App. 3d 383 , 487 N.E.2d 662 , aff'd (1986), 115 Ill. 2d 184 , 503 N.E.2d 331 .) Prior to sentencing the defendant, the trial court made reference to the impact of the offense on the victim, deterrence, defendant’s potential for rehabilitation and defendant’s “exemplary record in public service.” It is clear from the court’s comments that it weighed and considered both the mitigating and aggravating factors, and we will not substitute our judgment for that of the trial court.

1992App. 3d 383 , 487 N.E.2d 662 , aff'd (1986), 115 Ill. 2d 184 , 503 N.E.2d 331 .) Prior to sentencing the defendant, the trial court made reference to the impact of the offense on the victim, deterrence, defendant’s potential for rehabilitation and defendant’s “exemplary record in public service.” It is clear from the court’s comments that it weighed and considered both the mitigating and aggravating factors, and we will not substitute our judgment for that of the trial court.

1991App. 3d 383 , 487 N.E.2d 662 , aff’d (1986), 115 Ill. 2d 184 , 503 N.E.2d 331 .) It is clear from the trial judge’s comments that he weighed and considered both the mitigating and aggravating factors.

2022However, the court also considered the seriousness of the offenses, describing the circumstances of both offenses as “horrendous.” “[I]t is the trial court’s duty to balance the mitigating and aggravating factors and to make a reasoned decision as to the appropriate sentence.” Etherton, 2017 IL App (5th) 140427, ¶ 34 .

2021Etherton, 2017 IL App (5th) 140427, ¶ 34 .

2022Busse, 2016 IL App (1st) 142941, ¶ 27 ; see also Hauschild, 226 Ill. 2d 63, 90 (2007) (a sentence within statutory guidelines is presumptively valid). ¶ 84 III.

2021People v. Busse, 2016 IL App (1st) 142941, ¶ 27 ; see also People v. Hauschild, 226 Ill. 2d 63, 90 (2007) (a sentence within statutory guidelines is presumptively valid); see also People v. Tripp, 306 Ill.

2015We find the sentence proportionate to the nature of the offense and consistent with the purpose of the law, including balancing the seriousness of the offense with defendant’s rehabilitative potential (People v. Campbell, 2014 IL App (1st) 112926, ¶ 74 ), and no abuse of discretion by the trial court in imposing it. ¶ 43 CONCLUSION ¶ 44 In light of the foregoing, we affirm the judgment of the circuit court of Cook County. ¶ 45 Affirmed. - 10 -

2014We find the sentence proportionate to the nature of the offense and consistent with the purpose of the law, including balancing the seriousness of the offense with defendant's rehabilitative potential (People v. Campbell, 2014 IL App (1st) 112926, ¶ 74 ), and no abuse of discretion by the trial court in imposing it. ¶ 43 CONCLUSION ¶ 44 In light of the foregoing, we affirm the judgment of the circuit court of Cook County. ¶ 45 Affirmed. 12

2010Spencer, 303 Ill.App.3d at 871 , 237 Ill.Dec. 432 , 709 N.E.2d at 694 .

2010Spencer, 303 Ill.App.3d at 871 , 237 Ill.Dec. 432 , 709 N.E.2d at 694 .

2008Defense counsel stated most of these facts at sentencing; and the trial judge acknowledged that he had "[r]eviewed the background" and that "there are many things that go into sentencing." "[T]here is no mandatory requirement that the trial judge recite all" the mitigating and aggravating factors "before imposing *700 sentence." Jackson, 375 Ill.App.3d at 802 , 314 Ill.Dec. 496 , 874 N.E.2d 592 .

2008Defense counsel stated most of these facts at sentencing; and the trial judge acknowledged that he had "[r]eviewed the background" and that "there are many things that go into sentencing." "[T]here is no mandatory requirement that the trial judge recite all" the mitigating and aggravating factors "before imposing *700 sentence." Jackson, 375 Ill.App.3d at 802 , 314 Ill.Dec. 496 , 874 N.E.2d 592 .

2006Klimawicze, 352 Ill.

2006Klimawicze, 352 Ill.

2004People v. Cord , 239 Ill.

2004People v. Cord, 239 Ill.

2003“An abuse of discretion will be found only where the trial court’s ruling is arbitrary, fanciful, unreasonable, or where no reasonable person would take the view adopted by the trial court.” Hall, 195 Ill. 2d at 20 , 743 N.E.2d at 138 .

2003“An abuse of discretion will be found only where the trial court’s ruling is arbitrary, fanciful, unreasonable, or where no reasonable person would take the view adopted by the trial court.” Hall, 195 Ill. 2d at 20 , 743 N.E.2d at 138 .

1994(See People v. Saldivar (1986), 113 Ill.2d 256 , 100 Ill.Dec. 776 , 497 N.E.2d 1138 ; People v. Pierce (1991), 223 Ill.App.3d 423 , 165 Ill.Dec. 859 , 585 N.E.2d 255 .) That the defendant did not contemplate that his actions would cause serious physical harm is the second factor to be *793 considered in mitigation. 730 ILCS 5/5-5-3.1(a)(2) (West 1992).

1994(See People v. Saldivar (1986), 113 Ill. 2d 256 ; People v. Pierce (1991), 223 Ill.

1994(See People v. Saldivar (1986), 113 Ill.2d 256 , 100 Ill.Dec. 776 , 497 N.E.2d 1138 ; People v. Pierce (1991), 223 Ill.App.3d 423 , 165 Ill.Dec. 859 , 585 N.E.2d 255 .) That the defendant did not contemplate that his actions would cause serious physical harm is the second factor to be *793 considered in mitigation. 730 ILCS 5/5-5-3.1(a)(2) (West 1992).

1994(See People v. Saldivar (1986), 113 Ill. 2d 256 ; People v. Pierce (1991), 223 Ill.

1992Cox, 82 Ill. 2d at 280 , 412 N.E.2d at 547 .

1992Cox, 82 Ill. 2d at 280 , 412 N.E.2d at 547 .

1992(People v. Tatum (1989), 181 Ill.

1990(People v. Tatum (1989), 181 Ill.

2024The question for our consideration is whether the court abused its discretion, “not whether this court or any other court might have weighed the mitigating and aggravating factors differently.” (Emphasis in - 23 - original.) Klein, 2022 IL App (4th) 200599, ¶ 42 .