Determining Whether Consecutive Sentence Are Necessary to Protect the Public

In People v. Gray, 121 Ill. App. 3d 867, 460 N.E.2d 354, 77 Ill. Dec. 298 (1984), the defendant was convicted of involuntary manslaughter, obstruction of justice, and concealment of a homicidal death in connection with the death of his 2 1/2-year-old stepdaughter. Gray, 121 Ill. App. 3d at 868. He was sentenced to five years for the manslaughter and three years for obstruction, to run concurrently, and to nine years for concealment, to run consecutively to the other two sentences. Gray, 121 Ill. App. 3d at 868. On appeal, the defendant argued that the trial court erred in ordering the concealment sentence to run consecutively to the other two sentences. The Gray court agreed, noting that this was the first criminal conduct with which the defendant, who was in his 20s, had ever been associated. Gray, 121 Ill. App. 3d at 873. Additionally, according to the court, it was not dealing with punishment for the manslaughter, but with augmentation of the punishment for concealment. The court concluded that the facts of the case were insufficient to show that the consecutive sentence was necessary to protect the public. Gray, 121 Ill. App. 3d at 873.