Yesterday, 07:25 PM
Opinion here: https://ilcourtsaudio.blob.core.windows....130431.pdf
The argument seems to be that there was originally an agreement to not prosecute, with some representation that was a final resolution, and therefore it was unjust and wrong for the State to renege on it only because so many people thought it was a bad agreement.
There's lots more detail and a recap of the events of the case presented in the opinion.
So it looks like he got away with it, in the sense of this specific legal action, anyway.
The argument seems to be that there was originally an agreement to not prosecute, with some representation that was a final resolution, and therefore it was unjust and wrong for the State to renege on it only because so many people thought it was a bad agreement.
Quote:CONCLUSION
¶ 68 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:
Quote:“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:
Quote:“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.” Id.
¶ 69 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.
There's lots more detail and a recap of the events of the case presented in the opinion.
So it looks like he got away with it, in the sense of this specific legal action, anyway.
