Are Consecutive Sentences Necessary to Protect the Public if a Juvenile With No Criminal History is Cajoled to Commit Armed Robbery ? In People v. Rucker, 260 Ill. App. 3d 659, 633 N.E.2d 146, 198 Ill. Dec. 684 (1994), the defendant was convicted of two counts of armed robbery and sentenced to 6 and 14 years, respectively, to run consecutively. on appeal, the defendant argued that consecutive sentences were not necessary to protect the public. Rucker, 260 Ill. App. 3d at 660. The Rucker court agreed, finding that "on the facts of this case," the trial court erred in ordering the sentences to run consecutively. Rucker, 260 Ill. App. 3d at 663. In Rucker, the defendant was 17 years old, had no juvenile history, and he had suffered a series of personal problems that caused him to ultimately engage in the offenses at issue. In addition, the court noted that the defendant had not been the planner of the crimes, but was cajoled to participate by his co-offender. Rucker, 260 Ill. App. 3d at 662-63.