Donna Dupree, appealed a three-year prison sentence for theft of property valued at more than $300. According to his opinion, the trial court imposed a sentence of three years consecutively with an additional sentence of 11 years given to him after the conviction of three previous cases, which involved shoplifting and unauthorized use of a credit card, was revoked.
In People Of The State Of Illinois v. Donna Dupree, 2022 IL App (2d) 210400-U, No. 2-21-0400, Court of Appeals of Illinois, Second District (June 22, 2022).[n]something about the nature of the offense or [her] he pointed out that a consistent decision is needed to protect the public. “
The trial court held a combined sentence in this case and three previous cases in which Dupree was tried in drug court.
- On July 3, 2018, Dupree pleaded not guilty to three counts. Together, Dupree pleaded guilty to four Class 4 counts of unauthorized use of a credit card. The facts of the plea were that, on four occasions, Dupree knowingly used the decedent’s Discover credit card to make purchases at Family Dollar stores.
- In two other cases Dupree pleaded guilty to one count of Class 3 retail theft.
- Dupree was acquitted of one count of robbery when he committed the crimes as other charges.
The current investigation report (PSI) contained Dupree’s medical evaluations from previous years that indicated he had bipolar 2 disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, and a personality disorder – not otherwise specified – with compulsive and antisocial behavior.
The PSI showed 21 previous crimes, including 12 crimes. Most of these crimes were theft or robbery. Dupree also had three drug-related convictions, including unlawful delivery of a controlled substance, and one count of unlawful use of a weapon. Dupree was previously in drug court, but the court banned him from participating after a repeat offense. The PSI author found him at high risk of reoffending.
Dupree’s prior convictions made him eligible for lengthy prison terms on all three counts. The court made the two years concurrent. However, because Dupree stole the merchandise while on parole six years earlier in the case, he was forced to serve a consecutive five-year sentence. The suspended sentence was 11 years in prison.
On December 15, 2018, the State charged Dupree in a complaint with two counts of theft of property. Based on these allegations, the State, on December 19, 2018, filed a motion to have Dupree removed and to cease participation in drug court.
On April 24, 2019, a grand jury indicted Dupree on two counts of theft of property. Both alleged that, on December 14, 2018, Dupree shoplifted illegally from a Kohl’s store in South Elgin.
In the assessment of mental health and drug use, a biopsychosocial researcher stated: ” [Dupree] He suffered a lot of physical, sexual, and emotional abuse from many adults in his life. He ran away from home when he was 14, and that’s when he started drinking. He has fought with him [substance use disorder] (alcohol, cocaine, and marijuana) and has been sober for less than a year (3/14/18). He also suffers from kleptomania and has a court date later this week. “
Dupree had 17 felony convictions. That included the convictions in this case and the Cook County case, both of which he committed while in drug court.
The High Court also sentenced him to 11 years and ordered him to serve three consecutive years in prison.
He committed two new crimes, two new crimes.
The court found that a consecutive sentence was necessary after considering the circumstances of the case and Dupree’s background and character. Consecutive sentences are necessary to protect people, especially since Dupree had 17 prior convictions.
The government responds that, under the rule of consecutive sentencing, the concern belongs to Dupree criminal behavior. Consecutive sentencing is necessary in this case to protect the public from Dupree’s crimes of theft, embezzlement, fraud, and card fraud.
Dupree was diagnosed with kleptomania and admitted to a PSI investigator on the case that his “klepto brain” led him to steal from Kohl’s. He also admitted during a March 2018 psychiatric examination that “c[ould]don’t go into the store and don’t go out and steal things.”
The problem that the court faced was that Dupree had not shown the possibility of being prevented from his crimes.
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding that consecutive sentences were necessary to protect the public from Dupree’s criminal conduct. While he was in drug court for retail theft and credit card fraud, he committed the most common crime—more retail theft. Dupree had a history of theft and fraud and was diagnosed with kleptomania. The trial court made it clear that the only way to stop Dupree from stealing was to put him in prison.
Fraud, theft and other crimes require punishment to protect people. The Illinois court, after Dupree was found guilty of nearly 1,000 crimes, was given probation or treatment instead of prison, he wanted the court to protect people from stealing. Insurance fraudsters are similar even though they are rarely caught and therefore rarely go to jail. This needs to change – to protect people – criminals need to be punished and insurance fraud courts need to understand and consider the fact that many insurance fraudsters have won many times before they are caught and a stricter penalty is needed.