Find Court Cases > Go Back to List > People v. Purcell

People v. Purcell

Case Date: 10/30/2001
Court: 2nd District Appellate
Docket No: 2-01-1053 Rel

October 30, 2001

No. 2--01--1053

IN THE

APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS

SECOND DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE
OF ILLINOIS,

        Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

WILLARD PURCELL,

        Defendant-Appellant.

 )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)		 Appeal from the Circuit Court
of Winnebago County.



No. 01--CF--1783


Honorable
Rosemary Collins,
Judge, Presiding.


JUSTICE GEIGER delivered the opinion of the court:

The defendant, Willard Purcell, has filed the instant appealpursuant to Supreme Court Rule 604(c) (188 Ill. 2d R. 604(c)),seeking review of the September 10, 2001, order of the circuitcourt of Winnebago County denying bail. On appeal, the defendantargues (1) that section 110--4(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedureof 1963 (the Code) (725 ILCS 5/110--4(b) (West 2000)) isunconstitutional; and (2) that the trial court erred in denying hisrequest for pretrial bail.

On August 2001, the defendant was arrested and indicted onfour counts of first-degree murder (720 ILCS 5/9--1(a)(2), (a)(3),(b)(19) (West 2000)). The defendant was alleged to have killed hiswife, Barbara Purcell, by striking her repeatedly in the head witha blunt object. If convicted of the charged offense, the defendantmay receive a sentence of life imprisonment. 730 ILCS 5/5--8--1(a)(1)(b) (West 2000).

Following his arrest, the defendant filed a motion requestingbail. The defendant also filed a motion seeking a determinationthat section 110--4 of the Code (725 ILCS 5/110--4 (West 2000)) isunconstitutional. Section 110--4(a) provides that a defendant maynot obtain bail where "the proof is evident or the presumptiongreat" that the defendant committed a capital offense or an offensefor which he may be sentenced to life imprisonment. 725 ILCS5/110--4(a) (West 2000). Section 110--4(b) places the burden ofdemonstrating that the proof of guilt is not evident and thepresumption of guilt not great upon the individual seeking releaseon bail. 725 ILCS 5/110--4(b) (West 2000). In his motion beforethe trial court, the defendant argued that subsection (b) violatesthe presumption of innocence accorded to criminal defendants whileawaiting trial. See Stack v. Boyle, 342 U.S. 1, 96 L. Ed. 3, 72 S.Ct. 1 (1951).

On August 15, 2001, the trial court denied the defendant'smotion to declare section 110--4(b) of the Code unconstitutional. Then, on September 10, 2001, following a hearing, the trial courtdenied the defendant's motion for pretrial bail. The trial courtfound that the defendant did not meet his burden of demonstratingthat the proof of his guilt was not evident and that thepresumption of his guilt was not great. The defendant then filedthe instant appeal pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 604(c).

We will first address the defendant's constitutional argument. The right of an accused to obtain pretrial bail is governed byarticle I, section 9, of the Illinois Constitution of 1970. Ill.Const. 1970, art. I,