Background
A Jefferson County jury convicted Cody T. Rector of predatory criminal sexual assault and two child-pornography counts. The trial court imposed consecutive sentences totaling 75 years. On Rector’s prior appeal, the Fifth District affirmed his convictions but remanded because the original restitution order did not clearly state a maximum amount, duration, and other conditions.
After remand, the circuit court heard evidence that the child victim continued to experience serious psychological effects and attended counseling about twice monthly, at approximately $150 per session. The court ordered up to $11,836 in restitution, drawn from Rector’s remaining bond money, for counseling expenses. Rector argued that the order violated the statutory five-year payment limit and that counsel was ineffective for not objecting.
The Court’s Holding
The Fifth District affirmed. It held that the restitution order was authorized under section 5-5-6(f-1) of the Unified Code of Corrections, which permits restitution for long-term health care, including mental health care, without the ordinary five-year limitation.
The record supported a finding that the victim needed ongoing long-term mental-health treatment. Although the trial court did not make an expressly labeled special finding on monthly treatment costs, the evidence established the approximate per-session cost and frequency of counseling, and the court adopted a fixed restitution cap. The order limited Rector’s liability to the $11,836 remaining in his bond funds rather than imposing an indeterminate future obligation. Because an objection would have lacked merit, counsel was not ineffective for failing to raise one.
Key Takeaways
- Restitution for a victim’s long-term mental-health care may fall within section 5-5-6(f-1)’s exception to the ordinary five-year limit.
- Evidence of ongoing counseling, treatment frequency, and approximate session cost supported the restitution award.
- A restitution order capped at a defendant’s remaining bond funds establishes a fixed, limited obligation.
Why It Matters
The decision confirms that restitution for ongoing counseling after predatory criminal sexual assault may extend beyond the general five-year framework when the record supports long-term mental-health treatment. It also illustrates that appellate review focuses on whether the entered order is statutorily authorized, rather than solely on remarks made during the restitution hearing.