Center on Wrongful Convictions

Recommendation of GCCP

Action Taken to Date

#1. After a suspect has been identified, the police should continue to pursue all reasonable lines of inquiry, whether these point towards or away from the suspect.

Calls for a change in police procedure.  No action taken.

#2.

A. The police must list on schedules all existing   items of relevant evidence, including exculpatory evidence, and their location.

B. Record-keeping obligations must be assigned to specific police officers or employees, who must certify their compliance in writing to the prosecutor.

C. The police must give copies of the schedules to the prosecution.

D. The police must give the prosecutor access to all investigatory materials in their possession.

Implemented by SB 472.

#3. In a death eligible case, representation by the public defender during a custodial interrogation should be authorized by the Illinois legislature when a suspect requests the advice of counsel and where there is a reasonable belief that the suspect is indigent.  to the extent that there is some doubt about the indigency of the suspect, police should resolve the doubt in favor of allowing the suspect to have access to the public defender.

Not implemented.

#4. Custodial interrogations of a suspect in a homicide case occurring at a police facility should be videotaped.  Videotaping should not include merely the statement made by the suspect after interrogation, but the entire interrogation process.

Implemented by SB 15.

#5. Any statements by a homicide suspect which are not recorded should be repeated to the suspect on tape, and his or her comments recorded.

Implemented by SB 15.

#6. There are circumstances in which videotaping may not be practical, and some uniform method of recording such interrogations, such as tape recording, should be established.  Police investigators should carry tape recorders for use when interviewing suspects in homicide cases outside the station, and all such interviews should be audiotaped.

Not implemented.

#7. The Illinois Eavesdropping Act should be amended to permit police taping of statements without the suspects’ knowledge or consent in order to enable the videotaping and audiotaping of statements as recommended by the Commission.  The amendment should apply only to homicide cases, where the suspect is aware that the person asking the questions is a police officer.

Implemented by SB 15 and SB 472.

#8. The police should electronically record interviews conducted of significant witnesses in homicide cases where it is reasonably foreseeable that their testimony may be challenged at trial.

Not implemented.

#9. Police should be required to make a reasonable attempt to determine the suspect’s mental capacity before interrogation, and if the suspect is determined to be mentally retarded, the police should be limited to asking nonleading questions and prohibited from implying that they believe the suspect is guilty.

Not implemented.

#10. Where practicable, police departments should insure that the person who conducts the lineup or photospread should not be aware of which member of the lineup or photospread is the suspect.

Pilot project for double-blind sequential lineup implemented by SB 472.

#11. Eyewitnesses should be told explicitly that the suspected perpetrator might not be in the lineup or photospread, and therefore they should not feel that they must make an identification.

Eyewitnesses should also be told that they should not assume that the person administering the lineup or photospread knows which person is the suspect in the case.

Implemented by SB 472.

#12. If the administrator of the lineup or photospread does not know who the suspect is, a sequential procedure should be used, so that  the eyewitness views only one lineup member or photo at a time and makes a decision (that is the perpetrator or that is not the perpetrator) regarding each person before viewing another lineup member or photo.

Pilot project for double-blind sequential lineup implemented by SB 472.

#13. Suspects should not stand out in the lineup or photospread as being different from the distracters, based on the eyewitnesses’ previous description of the perpetrator, or based on other factors that would draw attention to the suspect.

Implemented by SB 472.

#14. A clear written statement should be made of any statements made by the eyewitness at the time of the identification procedure as to his or her confidence that the identified person is or is not the actual culprit.  This statement should be recorded prior to any feedback by law enforcement personnel.

Pilot project for double-blind sequential lineup implemented by SB 472 includes recording of the witnesses words regarding confidence.

#15. When practical, the police should videotape lineup procedures, including the witness’ confidence statement.

Not implemented.

#16. All police who work on homicide cases should receive periodic training in the following areas, and experts on these subjects be retained to conduct training and prepare training manuals on these topics:

1. The risks of false testimony by in-custody informants (“jailhouse snitches”).

2. The risks of false testimony by accomplice witnesses.

3. The dangers of tunnel vision and confirmatory bias.

4. The risks of wrongful conviction in homicide cases.

5. Police investigative and interrogation methods.

6. Police investigating and reporting of exculpatory evidence.

7. Forensic evidence.

8. The risks of false confessions.

Not implemented.

#17. Police academies, police agencies and the Illinois Department of Corrections should include within their training curricula information on consular rights and the notification obligations to be followed during the arrest and detention foreign nationals.

Not implemented.

#18. The Illinois General Assembly should remind all law enforcement agencies of their notification obligations under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and undertake regular reviews of the measures taken by state and local police to ensure full compliance.  This could include publication of a guide based on a U.S. State Department manual.

No policy changes.

#19. The statute relating the Illinois Law Enforcement Training Standards Board should be amended to add police perjury (regardless of whether there is a criminal conviction) as a basis upon which the Board may revoke certification of a peace officer.

Implemented by SB 472.

#20. An independent state forensic laboratory should be created, operated by civilian personnel, with its own budget, separate from any police agency or supervision.

Not implemented.

#21. Adequate funding should be provided by the State of Illinois to hire and train both entry level and supervisory level forensic scientists to support expansion of DNA testing and evaluation.  Support should also be provided for additional up-to-date facilities for DNA testing.  The State should be prepared to outsource by sending evidence to private companies for analysis when appropriate.

Not implemented.

#22. The Commission supports Supreme Court Committee Rule 417, establishing minimum standards for DNA evidence.

Endorsement of recent Supreme Court rule change.

#23. The Federal government and the State of Illinois should provide adequate funding to enable the development of a comprehensive DNA database.

Partially implemented, but not fully funded.

#24. Illinois statutes should be amended to provide that in capital cases a defendant may apply to the court for an order to obtain a search of the DNA database to identify others who may be guilty of the crime.

Implemented by SB 472.

#25. In capital cases forensic testing, including DNA testing pursuant to 725 ILCS 5/116(3), should be permitted when it has the scientific potential to produce new, noncumulative evidence relevant to the defendant’s assertion of factual innocence, even if the results may not completely exonerate the defendant.

Implemented by SB 472.

#26. The provisions governing the Capital Litigation Trust Fund should be construed broadly so as to provide a source of funding for forensic testing pursuant to 725 ILCS 5/116-3 when the defendant faces the possibility of a capital sentence.  For non-capital defendants, provisions should be made for payment of costs of forensic testing for indigents from sources other than the Capital Litigation Trust Fund.

Implemented by 472 for capital defendants.

#27. The current list of 20 eligibility factors should be reduced to a smaller number.

Not implemented.  

#28. There should be only five eligibility factors:

1. The murder of a police officer or firefighter killed in the performance of his/her official duties, or to prevent the performance of his/her official duties, or in retaliation for performing his/her official duties.

2. The murder of any person (inmate, staff, visitor, etc.) occurring at a correctional facility.

3. The murder of two or more persons as set forth in 720 ILCS 5/9-1(b)(3), as that provision has been interpreted by the Supreme Court

4. The intentional murder of a person involving the infliction of torture.  For the purposes of this section, torture means the intentional and depraved infliction of extreme physical pain for a prolonged period of time prior to the victim’s death; depraved means the defendant relished the infliction of extreme physical pain upon the victim evidencing debasement or perversion or that the defendant evidenced a sense of pleasure in the infliction of extreme physical pain.

5. The murder of a person who is under investigation for or who has been charged with or has been convicted of a crime which would be a felony under Illinois law, of anyone involved in an investigation, prosecution or defense of that crime, including but not limited to witnesses, jurors, judges, prosecutors and investigators.

Not implemented.  

The existing factor of murder in the course of another felony was slightly modified, removing arson, burglary, criminal drug conspiracy and streetgang drug conspiracy.  Of these, arson has been invoked in 6 capital convictions, and burglary has been invoked in 13 capital convictions since the death penalty was reinstated in Illinois in 1977.

#29. The Illinois Attorney General and the Illinois State’s Attorneys Association should adopt recommendations as to the procedures State’s Attorneys should follow in deciding whether or not to seek the death penalty, but these recommendations should not have the force of law or be imposed by court rule or legislation.

Implemented by SB 472.

#30. The death penalty sentencing stature should be revised to include a mandatory review of death eligibility undertaken by a state-side review committee.  In the absence of legislative action to make this a mandatory scheme, the Governor should make a commitment to setting  up a voluntary review process, supported by the presumption that the Governor will commute the death sentences of defendants when the prosecutor has not participated in the voluntary review process, unless the prosecutor can offer a compelling explanation based on exceptional circumstances, for the failure to submit the case for review.

Not implemented.

#31. The Commission supports Supreme Court Rule 416-c, requiring that the State announce its intention to seek the death penalty, and the factors to be relied upon, as soon as practicable, but in no event later than 120 days after arraignment.

Endorsement of recent Supreme Court rules change.

#32. The Illinois Supreme Court should give consideration to encouraging the Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts (AOIC) to undertake a concerted effort to educate trial judges throughout the state in the parameters of the Capital Crimes Litigation Act and the funding sources available for defense of capital cases.

Requires action of the Judicial Branch.  No action taken.

#33. The Commission supports the provisions of the new Illinois Supreme Court Rule 43 (which took effect March 1, 2001) as to “Seminars on Capital Cases.”  The Illinois Supreme Court should be encouraged to undertake more action as outlined in this report to ensure the highest quality training and support are provided to any judge trying a capital case.

The Commission also supports the revised Committee Comments to new Supreme Court Rule 43, which contemplate that capital case training will occur prior to the time a judge hears a capital case.  The Supreme Court should be encouraged going further and requiring that judges be trained before presiding over a capital case.

Endorsement of recent Supreme Court rules change.  

No action taken by the Court to require capital certification for judges.

#34. In light of the changes in Illinois Supreme Court rules governing the discovery process in capital cases, the Supreme Court should give consideration to ways the Court can insure that particularized training is provided to trial judges with respect to implementation of the new rules governing capital litigation, especially with respect to the management of the discovery process.

Requires action of the Judicial Branch.  No action taken.

#35. All judges who are trying capital cases should receive periodic training in the following areas, and experts on these subjects be retained to conduct training and prepare training manuals on these topics:

1. The risks of false testimony by in-custody informants (“jailhouse snitches”).

2. The risks of false testimony by accomplice witnesses.

3. The dangers of tunnel vision and confirmatory bias.

4. The risks of wrongful conviction in homicide cases.

5. Police investigative and interrogation methods.

6. Police investigating and reporting of exculpatory evidence.

7. Forensic evidence.

8. The risks of false confessions.

Requires action of the Judicial Branch.  No action taken.  In 2000 the Supreme Court Committee created Capital Litigation Seminars for judges, but they are not strictly required and do not include all of the issues in this recommendation.

#36. The Illinois Supreme Court, and the AOIC should consider development of and provide sufficient funding for state-wide materials to train judges in capital cases, and additional staff to provide research support.

Requires action of the Judicial Branch.  No action taken.

#37. The Illinois Supreme Court should consider ways in which information regarding relevant case law and other resources can be widely disseminated to those trying capital cases, through development of a digest of applicable law by the Supreme Court and wider publication of the outline of issues developed by the State Appellate Defender or the State Appellate Prosecutor and/or Attorney General.

Requires action of the Judicial Branch.  

The Illinois Senate passed a non-binding resolution, SR 18, which was delivered to the Chief Justice, urging the Court to implement this reform.

#38. The Illinois Supreme Court, or the chief judge of the various judicial districts throughout the state, should consider implementation of a process to certify judges who are qualified to hear capital cases either by virtue of experience or training.  Trial court judges should be certified as qualified to hear capital cases based upon completion of specialized training and based upon their experience in hearing criminal cases.  Only such certified judges should hear capital cases.

Requires action of the Judicial Branch.

The Illinois Senate passed a non-binding resolution, SR 19, which was delivered to the Chief Justice, urging the Court to implement this reform.

#39. The Illinois Supreme Court should consider appointment of a standing committee of trial judges and/or appellate justices familiar with capital case management to provide resources to trial judges throughout the state who are responsible for trying capital cases.

#40. The Commission supports new Illinois Supreme Court Rule 416(d), regarding qualifications for counsel in capital cases.

Requires action of the Judicial Branch.

The Illinois Senate passed a non-binding resolution SR 17, which was delivered to the Chief Justice, urging the Court to implement this reform.

#41. The Commission supports new Illinois Supreme Court Rule 701(b) which imposes the requirement that those appearing as lead or co-counsel in a capital case be first admitted to the Capital Litigation Bar under Rule 714.

Endorsement of recent Supreme Court rules change.

#42. The Commission supports new Illinois Supreme Court Rule 714 which imposes requirements on the qualifications of attorneys handling capital cases.

Endorsement of recent Supreme Court rules change.

#43. The Office of the State Appellate Defender should facilitate the dissemination of information with respect to defense counsel qualified under the proposed Supreme Court process.

Currently being implemented.

#44. The Commission supports efforts to have training for prosecutors and defenders in capital litigation, and to have funding provided to insure that training programs continue to be of the highest quality.

Not implemented.

#45. All prosecutors and defense lawyers who are members of the Capital Trial Bar who are trying capital cases should receive periodic training in the following and experts on these subjects be retained to conduct training and prepare training manuals on these topics:

1. The risks of false testimony by in-custody informants (“jailhouse snitches”).

2. The risks of false testimony by accomplice witnesses.

3. The dangers of tunnel vision and confirmatory bias.

4. The risks of wrongful conviction in homicide cases.

5. Police investigative and interrogation methods.

6. Police investigating and reporting of exculpatory evidence.

7. Forensic evidence.

8. The risks of false confessions

Not implemented.

#46. The Commission supports new Illinois Supreme Court Rule 416(e) which permits discovery depositions in capital cases on leave of court for good cause.

Endorsement of recent Supreme Court rules change.

#47. The Commission supports the provisions of the new Illinois Supreme Court Rule 416(f) mandating case management conferences in capital cases.  The Illinois Supreme Court should consider adoption of a rule requiring a final case management conference in capital cases to ensure that there has been compliance with the newly mandated rules, that discovery is complete, and that the case is fully prepared for trial.

Endorsement of recent Supreme Court rules change.

No action taken on recommended Supreme Court rule change.

#48. The Commission supports Illinois Supreme Court Rule 416(g), which requires that a certificate be filed by the state indicating that a conference has been held with all those persons who participated in the investigation or trial preparation  of the case, and that all information required to be disclosed has been disclosed.

Endorsement of recent Supreme Court rules change.

#49. The Illinois Supreme Court should adopt a rule defining “exculpatory evidence” in order to provide guidance to counsel in making appropriate disclosures.  The Commission recommends the following definition: Exculpatory information includes, but is not limited to, all information that is material and favorable to the defendant because it tends to 1) Cast doubt on the defendant’s guilt as to any essential element in any count in the indictment or information; 2) Cast doubt on the admissibility of evidence that the state anticipates offering in its case-in-chief that might be subject to motion to suppress or exclude; 3) Cast doubt on the credibility or accuracy of any evidence that the state anticipates offering in its case-in-chief; or 4) Diminish the degree of the defendant’s culpability or mitigate the defendant’s potential sentence.

Calls for action of Judicial Branch.  No action taken.

#50. Illinois law should require that any discussions with a witness or the representative of a witness concerning benefits, potential benefits or detriments conferred on a witness by any prosecutor, police official, corrections official, or anyone else, should be reduced to writing, and should be disclosed to the defense in advance of trial.

Implemented by 472.

#51. Whenever the state may introduce the testimony of an in-custody informant who has agreed to testify for the prosecution in a capital case to a statement allegedly made by the defendant, at either the guilt or the sentencing phase, the state should promptly inform the defense as to the identification and background of the witness.

Implemented by 472.  

The Senate also passed SR 21 urging the Supreme Court to adopt this recommendation via rules change.

#52. A) Prior to trial, the trial judge shall hold an evidentiary hearing to determine the reliability and admissibility of the in-custody informant’s testimony at either the guilt or the sentencing phase. B) At the pre-trial evidentiary hearing, the trial judge shall use the following standards: The prosecution bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the witness’ testimony is reliable.  The trial judge may consider the following factors, as well as any other factors bearing on the witness’ credibility: 1) The specific statements to which the witness will testify; 2) The time and place, and other circumstances regarding the alleged statements; 3) Any deal or inducement made by the informant and the police or prosecutors in exchange for the witness’ testimony; 4) The criminal history of the witness; 5) Whether the witness has ever recanted his/her testimony; 6) Other cases in which the witness testified to alleged confessions by others; 7) Any other known evidence that may attest to or diminish the credibility of the witness, including the presence or absence of any relationship between the accused and the witness.

The state may file an interlocutory appeal from a ruling suppressing the testimony of an in-custody informant, pursuant to Illinois Supreme Court Rule 604.

Implemented by SB 472.

#53. In capital cases, courts should closely scrutinize any tactic that misleads the suspect as to the strength of the evidence against him/her, or the likelihood of his/her guilt, in order to determine whether this tactic would be likely to induce an involuntary or untrustworthy confession.

Admonition to judicial branch.  No specific action called for.

#54. The Commission makes no recommendation about whether or not plea negotiations should be restricted with respect to the death penalty.

Endorsement of current practice.

#55. Expert testimony with respect to the problems associated with eyewitness testimony may be helpful in appropriate cases.  Determinations as to whether such evidence may be admitted should be resolved by the trial judge on a case by case basis.

Calls for action of Judicial Branch.  

The Illinois Senate passed a non-binding resolution SR 28, which was delivered to the Chief Justice, urging the Court to implement this reform.

#56. Jury instructions with respect to eyewitness testimony should enumerate factors for the jury to consider, including the difficulty in making a cross-racial identification.  The current version of IPI is a step in the right direction, but should be improved.  IPI 3.15 should also be amended to add a final sentence which states as follows: Eyewitness evidence should be carefully examined in light of other evidence in the case.

Calls for action of Judicial Branch.  No action taken.

#57 The Committee on the Illinois Pattern Jury Instructions-Criminal should consider a jury instruction providing a special caution with respect to the reliability of the testimony of in-custody informants.

Calls for action of Judicial Branch.  No action taken.

#58 IPI – Criminal-3.06 and 3.07 should be supplemented by adding the italicized sentences, to be given only when a defendant’s statement is not recorded: “You have before you evidence that the defendant made a statement relating to the offence charged in the indictment.  It is for you to determine [whether the defendant made the statement and if so,] what weight should be given to the statement.  In determining the weight to be given to a statement, you should consider all of the circumstances under which it was made.  You should pay particular attention to whether or not the statement is recorded, and if it is, what method was used to record it.  Generally, an electronic recording that contains the defendant’s actual voice or a statement written by the defendant is more reliable than a non-recorded summary.

Calls for action of Judicial Branch.  No action taken.

#59 Illinois courts should continue to reject the results of polygraph examination during the innocence/guilt phase of capital trials.

Endorsement of current practice.

#60 The Commission supports the new amendments to Supreme Court Rule 411, which make the rules of discovery applicable to the sentencing phase of capital cases.

Endorsement of recent Supreme Court Rule change.

#61 The mitigating factors considered by the jury in the death penalty sentencing scheme should be expanded to include the defendant’s history of extreme emotional or physical abuse, and that the defendant suffers from a reduced mental capacity.

Implemented by SB 472.

#62 The defendant should have the right to make a statement on his own behalf during the aggravation/mitigation phase, without being subject to cross-examination.

Not implemented.

#63 The jury should be instructed as to the alternative sentences that may be imposed in the event that the death penalty is not imposed.

Not implemented.

#64 Illinois courts should continue to reject the results of polygraph  examinations during the sentencing phase of capital trials.

Endorsement of current practice.

#65 The statute which establishes the method by which the jury should arrive at its sentence should be amended to include language such as that contained in former SB1903 to make it clear that the jury should weigh the factors in the case and reach its own independent conclusion about whether the death penalty should be imposed.  The statute should be amended to read as follows: If the jury determines unanimously, after weighing the factors in aggravation and mitigation, that death is the appropriate sentence. . . .

Implemented by SB 472.

#66 After the jury renders its judgment with respect to the imposition of the death penalty, the trial judge should be required to indicate on the record whether he or she concurs in the result.  In cases where the trial judge does not concur in the imposition of the death penalty, the defendant shall be sentenced to natural life as a mandatory alternative (assuming the adoption of the new death penalty sentencing scheme limited to five eligibility factors.)

Not implemented, however an alternative measure was implemented that requires a trial judge who does not concur with a jury’s finding for a death sentence to explain in written detail and with relevant documents why s/he does not concur.  This material becomes part of the record for appellate review.  The bill also gives the Illinois Supreme Court has broad new powers to overturn death sentences if deems “fundamentally unjust.”

#67 In any case approved for capital punishment under the new death penalty scheme with five eligibility factors, if the finder of fact determines that death is not the appropriate sentence, the mandatory alternative sentence would be natural life.

Not implemented.

#68 Illinois should adopt a statute which prohibits the imposition of the death penalty for those defendants found to be mentally retarded.

Implemented by SB 472.  Retardation may be raised pre-trial, in mitigation and post-conviction.

#69 Illinois should adopt a statute which provides: A. The uncorroborated testimony of an in-custody informant witness concerning the confession or admission of the defendant may not be the sole basis for imposition of a death penalty.

B. Convictions for murder based upon the testimony of a single eyewitness or accomplice, without any other corroboration, should not be death eligible under any circumstances.

Implemented by SB 472.  The new law narrowly follows the recommendation, and leaves key concepts of ‘corroboration’ and ‘sole basis’ undefined and unelaborated.

#70 In capital cases the Illinois Supreme Court should consider on direct appeal 1) whether the sentence was imposed due to some arbitrary factor, 2) whether an independent weighing of the aggravating and mitigating circumstances indicates death was the proper sentence, and 3) whether the sentence of death was excessive or disproportionate to the penalty imposed in similar cases.

An explicit proportionality review is not implemented, however SB 472 gives the Illinois Supreme Court broad power to overturn death sentences it finds “fundamentally unjust” without need to rely on procedural grounds for justification.

#71 Rule 3.8 of the Illinois Supreme Court Rules of Professional Conduct, Special Responsibilities of a Prosecutor, should be amended in paragraph (c) by the addition of the language italicized: A public prosecutor or other government lawyer in criminal litigation shall make timely disclosure to counsel for the defendant, or to the defendant if the defendant is not represented by a lawyer, of the existence of evidence, known to the prosecutor or other government lawyer, that tends to negate the guilt of the accused or mitigate the degree of the offence.  Following conviction, a public prosecutor or other government lawyer has the continuing obligation to make timely disclosure to the counsel for the defendant, or to the defendant if the defendant is not represented by a lawyer, of the existence of evidence, known to the prosecutor or other government lawyer, that tends to negate the guilt of the accused or mitigate the defendant’s capital sentence.  For purposes of this post-conviction disclosure responsibility “timely disclosure” contemplates that the prosecutor or other government lawyer should have the opportunity to investigate matters related to the new evidence.

Calls for action of Judicial Branch.

The Illinois Senate passed a non-binding resolution, SR 20, which was delivered to the Chief Justice, urging the Court to implement this reform.

#72 The Post-Conviction Hearing Act should be amended to provide that a petition for a post-conviction proceeding in a capital case should be filed within 6 months after the issuance of the mandate by the Supreme Court following affirmance of the direct appeal from the trial.

Implemented by SB 472

#73 The Illinois Post-Conviction Hearing Act should be amended to provide that in capital cases, the trial court should convene the evidentiary hearing on the petition within one year of the date the petition is filed.

Implemented by SB 472

#74 The Post-Conviction Hearing Act should be amended to provide that in capital cases, a proceeding may be initiated in cases in which there is newly discovered evidence which offers a substantial basis to believe that the defendant is actually innocent, and such proceedings should be available at any time following the defendant’s conviction regardless of other provisions of the act limiting the time within such proceedings can be initiated.  In order to prevent frivolous petitions, the Act should provide that in proceedings asserting a claim of actual innocence, the court may make an initial determination with or without a hearing that the claim is frivolous.

Implemented by SB 472

#75 Illinois law should provide that after all appeals have been exhausted and the Attorney General applies for a final execution date for the defendant, a clemency petition may not be filed later than 30 days after the date that the Illinois Supreme Court enters an order setting an execution date.

Clemency process modified by other legislation.

#76 Leaders in both the executive and legislative branches should significantly improve the resources available to the criminal justice system in order to permit the meaningful implementation of reforms in capital cases.

Not implemented.

#77 The Capital Crimes Litigation Act, which is the state statute containing the Capital Litigation Trust Fund and other provisions, should be reauthorized by the General Assembly.

Implemented by SB 472.  

#78 The Commission supports the concept articulated in the statute governing the Capital Litigation Trust Fund, that adequate compensation be provided to trial counsel in capital cases for both time and expense, and encourages regular reconsideration of the hourly rates authorized under the statute to reflect the actual market rates of private attorneys.

No legislative action taken.

#79 The provisions of the Capital Litigation Trust Fund should be construed broadly as possible to insure that public defenders, particularly those in rural parts of the state, can effectively use its provisions to secure additional counsel and reimbursement of all reasonable trial related expenses in capital cases.

No legislative implementation.  Unclear whether implemented de facto.

#80 The work of State Appellate Defender’s office in providing statewide trial support in capital cases should continue, and funds should be appropriated for this purpose.

Endorsement of current role of OSAD.  Appropriations for this purpose unknown.

#81 The Commission supports the recommendations in the Report of the Task Force on Professional Practice in the Illinois Justice System to reduce the burden of student loans for those entering criminal justice careers and improve salary levels and pension contributions for those in the system in order to insure retention of qualified counsel.

Not implemented.  

#82 Adequate funding should be provided by the State of Illinois to all Illinois police agencies to pay for electronic recording equipment, personnel and facilities needed to conduct electronic recordings in homicide cases.

Appropriation for taping is being researched.  SB 15 takes effect two years after becoming law.

#83 The Commission strongly urges consideration of ways to broaden the application of many of the recommendations made by the commission to improve the criminal justice system as a whole.

Some reforms implemented extend beyond capital cases.

#84 Information should be collected at the trial level with respect to the prosecutions of first degree murder cases, by trial judge, which would detail information that could prove valuable in assessing whether the death penalty is, in fact, being fairly applied.  Data should be collected on a form which provides details about the trial, the background of the defendant, and the basis of the sentence imposed.  The forms should be collected by the Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts, and the form from an individual case should not be a public record.  Data collected from the forms should be public, and should be maintained in a public access database by the Criminal Justice Information Authority.

Not implemented.  

SB 472 creates a commission to evaluate the impact of reforms to the capital punishment system.  The report of the committee is to include “the impact of the reforms on the issue of uniformity and proportionality in the application of the death penalty, including but not limited to the tracking of data related to whether the reforms have eliminated the statistically significant differences in sentencing related to the geographic location of the homicide and the race of the victim found by the Governor’s Commission on Capital Punishment in its report issued on April 15, 2002.”

#85 Judges should be reminded of their obligations under Canon 3 to report violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct by prosecutors and defense lawyers.

Admonition to Judicial Branch.  No specific action called for.