People v. Boyce

2015 IL 117108 · Illinois Supreme Court · 2015

Facts

Defendant Anthony Boyce, serving a natural life sentence in prison, mailed a series of letters. These letters were intercepted and opened by prison officials before reaching their intended recipient, Xavier Tripp. The contents of the letters requested Tripp to commit the first-degree murder of an "unidentified drug addict." Based on these letters, Boyce was charged with solicitation of murder and attempted solicitation of murder.

Procedural history

Defendant was convicted in the circuit court of Cook County of attempted solicitation of murder. He had filed a motion to dismiss the solicitation charge, which the State subsequently nol-prossed, and argued that attempted solicitation of murder does not exist. The circuit court denied his posttrial motion, and the appellate court affirmed his conviction. The case then came before the Illinois Supreme Court.

Issue

Does the offense of attempted solicitation of murder exist in Illinois, particularly when the communication requesting the murder (letters) is intercepted and never reaches the intended recipient?

Holding

Yes, the offense of attempted solicitation of murder exists in Illinois, and the defendant was properly convicted of this offense even though his letters were intercepted.

Rule

The Illinois solicitation statute (720 ILCS 5/8-1.1(a)) requires a completed communication for the crime of solicitation to be complete, meaning a letter must reach its intended recipient. This is inferred from the legislature's omission of the Model Penal Code's provision for uncommunicated solicitation. However, the general attempt statute (720 ILCS 5/8-4(a)) applies to all offenses unless there is an inherent impossibility or the legislature explicitly includes 'attempt' language within the specific offense's definition. Since there is no inherent impossibility in applying the general attempt statute to solicitation, and the solicitation statute lacks 'attempt' language, attempted solicitation of murder is a valid offense, holding defendants criminally responsible for taking a substantial step towards solicitation, even if the communication is intercepted.

Read the full opinion on CourtListener

Case brief last reviewed . Prepared by CaseReader from the published opinion.