{
  "id": 3628807,
  "name": "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RICHARD MERCADO, Defendant-Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "People v. Mercado",
  "decision_date": "1983-11-10",
  "docket_number": "No. 83\u2014223",
  "first_page": "461",
  "last_page": "464",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "119 Ill. App. 3d 461"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "109 Ill. App. 3d 1150",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        5451034
      ],
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "1160"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/109/1150-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "114 Ill. App. 3d 265",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        3590306
      ],
      "year": 1982,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "271"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/114/0265-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "97 Ill. 2d 502",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        5515833
      ],
      "year": 1983,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/97/0502-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "64 Ill. 2d 485",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        5430641
      ],
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "487-89"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/64/0485-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "43 Ill. App. 3d 328",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        2726966
      ],
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "330"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/43/0328-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "52 Ill. App. 3d 277",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        3390908
      ],
      "year": 1976,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "283"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/52/0277-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "86 Ill. App. 3d 575",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        3183673
      ],
      "year": 1977,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "585"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/86/0575-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "53 Ill. App. 3d 36",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        3391150
      ],
      "year": 1980,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/53/0036-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "105 Ill. App. 3d 129",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        5471389
      ],
      "year": 1977,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "135"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/105/0129-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "93 Ill. App. 3d 877",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        3134257
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "882-83"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/93/0877-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "19 Ill. App. 3d 781",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        2693112
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "790"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/19/0781-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "98 S. Ct. 273",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "S. Ct.",
      "year": 1974,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "54 L. Ed. 2d 181",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "L. Ed. 2d",
      "year": 1974,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "434 U.S. 894",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "U.S.",
      "case_ids": [
        6405124,
        6405222,
        6405325,
        6406317,
        6405935,
        6405421,
        6405041,
        6405555,
        6404951,
        6405786,
        6405661,
        6406111
      ],
      "year": 1974,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/us/434/0894-03",
        "/us/434/0894-04",
        "/us/434/0894-05",
        "/us/434/0894-12",
        "/us/434/0894-10",
        "/us/434/0894-06",
        "/us/434/0894-02",
        "/us/434/0894-07",
        "/us/434/0894-01",
        "/us/434/0894-09",
        "/us/434/0894-08",
        "/us/434/0894-11"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "66 Ill. 2d 551",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        5463653
      ],
      "year": 1977,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "566"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/66/0551-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "71 Ill. 2d 132",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        5450360
      ],
      "year": 1977,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/71/0132-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 359,
    "char_count": 5424,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.75,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.1593037169522749e-07,
      "percentile": 0.5836929102816419
    },
    "sha256": "560fdcdf3f4ab55203a6bfe7f12fc836ee14a5261c47fcf67fa05669d74d823e",
    "simhash": "1:162a1dd46c4d6061",
    "word_count": 899
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:31:44.831415+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RICHARD MERCADO, Defendant-Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "JUSTICE NASH\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nAfter trial by jury defendant, Richard Mercado, was found guilty of three offenses of reckless homicide (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1981, ch. 38, par. 9 \u2014 3(a)) arising from an automobile collision in which three persons were killed. He was also convicted of driving while under the influence of alcohol (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1981, ch. 951/2, par. 11 \u2014 501(a)(1)) and of driving with a blood alcohol concentration of .10% or more (111. Rev. Stat. 1981, ch. 95 1/2, par. 11 \u2014 501(a)(2)). Defendant was sentenced to concurrent terms of three years\u2019 imprisonment for each reckless homicide conviction and concurrent 364-day terms for the driving under the influence of alcohol convictions.\nOn appeal, defendant does not contest the sufficiency of the evidence to support his convictions, but contends (1) two of the three convictions for reckless homicide must be vacated as having arisen from the same act; (2) one of the driving while under the influence of alcohol convictions must be vacated on the same grounds; and (3) the cause should be remanded for resentencing if any of his convictions are vacated because the trial judge may have been influenced by a vacated conviction in imposing sentence.\nWe vacate one conviction and sentence for driving under the influence of alcohol and in all other respects affirm the judgment of the circuit court.\nDefendant contends first that as more than one offense may not be carved from the same physical act (People v. Manning (1978), 71 Ill. 2d 132; People v. King (1977), 66 Ill. 2d 551, 566, cert, denied (1977), 434 U.S. 894, 54 L. Ed. 2d 181, 98 S. Ct. 273), two of the reckless homicide convictions must be vacated. He argues his single act in this instance was driving the automobile which caused the three deaths, citing People v. Holtz (1974), 19 Ill. App. 3d 781.\nIn Holtz, one of defendant\u2019s two convictions for involuntary manslaughter was reversed where both arose from defendant\u2019s act of pulling the steering wheel of a car from the driver\u2019s control, causing the car to swerve into another car killing its two occupants, the court noting there could be but one conviction of crime for a single act (19 Ill. App. 3d 781, 790). A different, and we think more persuasive, conclusion has been reached in later cases where the courts have considered the fact defendant\u2019s act was directed against multiple victims.\nIn People v. Grover (1981), 93 Ill. App. 3d 877, defendant was convicted of reckless homicide and three counts of reckless conduct arising from an automobile collision. The majority of the panel on the reviewing court rejected defendant\u2019s argument that since the death and injuries resulted from his single act of driving, the reckless conduct conviction must be vacated. The court noted a distinction existed between cases where multiple offenses were committed against single victims and single acts directed against multiple victims. In finding defendant was properly convicted of all four offenses it noted that the reckless homicide and each of the three reckless conduct offenses required proof of facts the others do not; that injury occurred to separate persons and their identity (93 Ill. App. 3d 877, 882-83). See also People v. Davis (1982), 105 Ill. App. 3d 129, 135; People v. Washington (1977), 53 Ill. App. 3d 36; People v. Smith (1980), 86 Ill. App. 3d 575, 585; People v. Bigsby (1977), 52 Ill. App. 3d 277, 283; People v. Thomas (1976), 43 Ill. App. 3d 328, 330.\nThe distinction between acts affecting only one victim and those affecting multiple victims was also noted in People v. Butler (1976), 64 Ill. 2d 485, 487-89. We conclude defendant was properly convicted of three offenses of reckless homicide against the three victims.\nThe State concedes that one of defendant\u2019s convictions for driving under the influence of intoxicating liquor must be Vacated as both are dependent upon the same conduct. Accordingly, we vacate the conviction and sentence imposed for the offense premised upon section 11 \u2014 501(a)(2) of the Illinois Vehicle Code as charged in count\nIV of the information.\nWe do not agree with defendant\u2019s final assertion that having vacated one of the convictions, remandment for a new sentencing hearing is required. It is apparent from the record of the sentencing hearing that the trial judge did not consider the now vacated conviction in imposing sentence for the other offenses. The judge expressed the basis for imposition of maximum sentences for each offense and there is no suggestion the court was influenced by the now vacated conviction in doing so. See People v. Alejos (1983), 97 Ill. 2d 502; People v. Taylor (1983), 114 Ill. App. 3d 265, 271; People v. Owens (1982), 109 Ill. App. 3d 1150,1160.\nAccordingly, the judgment of conviction and sentence imposed under count IV of the information will be vacated and in all other respects the judgment of the circuit court will be affirmed.\nJudgment vacated in part and affirmed.\nLINDBERG and UNVERZAGT, JJ., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "JUSTICE NASH"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "G. Joseph Weller, of State Appellate Defender\u2019s Office, of Elgin, for appellant.",
      "Fred L. Foreman, State\u2019s Attorney, of Waukegan (Phyllis J. Perko and Judith M. Pietrucha, both of State\u2019s Attorney\u2019s Appellate Service Commission, of counsel), for the People."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RICHARD MERCADO, Defendant-Appellant.\nSecond District\nNo. 83\u2014223\nOpinion filed November 10, 1983.\nG. Joseph Weller, of State Appellate Defender\u2019s Office, of Elgin, for appellant.\nFred L. Foreman, State\u2019s Attorney, of Waukegan (Phyllis J. Perko and Judith M. Pietrucha, both of State\u2019s Attorney\u2019s Appellate Service Commission, of counsel), for the People."
  },
  "file_name": "0461-01",
  "first_page_order": 483,
  "last_page_order": 486
}