Abstract
One act should only amount to one crime. Illinois employs the one-act, one-crime doctrine which, as the name states, only allows a defendant to be convicted of one offense, based on a single act. The Illinois Supreme Court has constantly redefined and changed the circumstances of when this rule applies. More recently, it has failed to apply this rule in situations that it was created to prevent.
In People v. Almond, the Illinois Supreme Court decided not to apply the one-act, one-crime doctrine where the defendant had been charged with two crimes—possession of a gun and possession of the ammunition inside that gun—based on a single act. This Note explains that the Illinois Supreme Court was incorrect in failing to apply this doctrine.
This Note argues that the Illinois Supreme Court failed to look at the plain meaning of the statute, applied inapplicable precedent, and failed to consider the purpose of the doctrine. Finally, this Note concludes that the Illinois Supreme Court’s interpretation in Almond carved out a rule that has neither a true beginning nor an end.
Recommended Citation
Rahnesha Williams,
One Act, Many Crimes? Analyzing the Court’s Decision in People v. Almond, 2015 IL 113817, 32 N.E.3d 535,
41
S. Ill. U. L.J.
505
(2017).
Available at:
https://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/siulj/vol41/iss3/6