What Is a Motion for Relief?

Ever heard of a motion for relief?  No—not a motion to reconsider, or motion for new trial or judgment notwithstanding the verdict—but a motion for relief. For criminal law practitioners, the motion for relief is now the lynchpin for obtaining appellate jurisdiction over interlocutory orders granting or denying pretrial release pursuant to the Safety, Accountability, Fairness and Equity-Today (SAFE-T) Act (Act).¹ Enacted in 2021, with a modified effective date of September 18, 2023, the Act established a no-cash bail system of pretrial release in Illinois. 725 ILCS 5/110-1.5 (West 2024). In preparing for the Act’s implementation, the Illinois Supreme Court amended Supreme Court Rule 604 to permit interlocutory appellate review of orders imposing conditions of pretrial release, granting or denying a petition to deny pretrial release, or revoking or refusing to revoke pretrial release. Ill. S. Ct. R. 604(h) (eff. Sept. 23, 2023). A relatively recent revision to Rule 604(h) requires a party appealing from specified pretrial detention or release orders to file a motion for relief in the trial court before filing a notice of appeal. Ill. S. Ct. R. 604(h)(2) (eff. Apr. 15, 2024). Rule 604(h)(2) provides as follows:

(2) Motion for Relief. As a prerequisite to appeal, the party taking the appeal shall first present to the trial court a written motion requesting the same relief to be sought on appeal and the grounds for such relief. The trial court shall promptly hear and decide the motion for relief. Upon appeal, any issue not raised in the motion for relief, other than errors occurring for the first time at the hearing on the motion for relief, shall be deemed waived.” Ill. S. Ct. R. 604(h)(2) (eff. Apr. 15, 2024).

As clearly outlined in the rule, the motion for relief is a procedural prerequisite to jurisdiction in the appellate court. A party seeking to appeal is tasked with filing a motion for relief, or “mini-brief,” in the trial court, setting forth the alleged errors that occurred during the detention proceedings and the grounds for the relief requested. The motion for relief will also serve as the argument of the appellant on appeal, as the appellant may file, but is not required to file, a memorandum in the appellate court.² Ill. S. Ct. R. 604(h)(7) (eff. Apr. 15, 2024). The moving party is required to provide sufficiently detailed contentions of error and supporting arguments to afford the circuit court an opportunity to address simple, correctable errors before appeal and to enable meaningful appellate review. Importantly, any ground not specified in the motion for relief is deemed waived on appeal. Before considering the content of the motion for relief further, it may be useful to briefly review pretrial detention proceedings.

In enacting the SAFE-T Act, the legislature abolished cash bail in Illinois and established a default rule providing that persons charged with qualifying criminal offenses shall be eligible for pretrial release, with appropriate conditions of release. 725 ILCS 5/110-1.5, 110-2 (West 2022). The SAFE-T Act, however, permits the State to seek, and the trial court to order, pretrial detention in certain cases. Upon the filing of a verified petition to deny pretrial release, the State bears the burden to prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that the defendant presents a present threat to the safety of a specific individual or the community or poses a flight risk, and that no condition(s) of pretrial release can alleviate the threat. 725 ILCS 5/110-6.1 (West 2022). Depending upon the proof offered by the parties, the circuit court may grant or deny pretrial detention. 725 ILCS 5/110-6.1 (West 2022). If the circuit court denies the State’s petition for pretrial detention, the court may order the defendant’s pretrial release subject to specific conditions of release, such as having no contact with a particular person or wearing an electronic monitoring device. 725 ILCS 5/110-10 (West 2022). The SAFE-T Act permits either party to appeal specific rulings of the court. 725 ILCS 5/110-6.1 (j), (k) (West 2022).

Pursuant to Rule 604(h)(1), the State may appeal if it has objections to the conditions of release imposed by the circuit court or if its petition to detain (or revoke) the defendant is denied by the circuit court. Ill. S. Ct. R. 604(h)(1)(i), (ii), (iv) (eff. Apr. 15, 2024). Similarly, the defendant has a right to appeal from an order of the circuit court that imposes conditions of pretrial release, revokes pretrial release, or denies pretrial release. Ill. S. Ct. R. 604(h)(1)(i), (ii), (iii) (eff. Apr. 15, 2024). But unlike appeals from final judgments, neither the State, nor the defendant, can simply file a notice of appeal asserting objections to the order of the circuit court. Instead, Rule 604(h)(2) requires a party to first file a motion for relief as a procedural prerequisite to appeal.

Upon filing the motion for relief, the moving party carries the burden of proving the circuit court committed error during the detention proceedings. The moving party must specifically identify all contentions of error and requests for relief, setting forth all relevant arguments and supporting grounds. The pretrial detention or release order is the focus of the motion for relief, and that order should be specifically identified in the motion. Attachment of the order complained of might be a welcome addition to the motion for relief; however, practitioners should be forewarned that attaching the order alone, without identifying specific claims of error, will not satisfy the stringent requirements of the rule. Given that the motion for relief may serve as the argument on appeal, citations to the record if available, evidence, and/or case law in support of the arguments would be useful. Again, the take-home message is that the motion for relief must contain all contentions of error and grounds for the relief, with arguments of sufficient detail to allow for meaningful appellate review. Issues not raised in the motion for relief will be deemed waived. Ill. S. Ct. R. 604(h)(2) (eff. Apr. 15, 2024).

In actual practice, many practitioners have thus far failed to adhere to the specific requirements of the motion for relief. The habitual (or typical) reaction of a defense practitioner has been to file a motion to reconsider. As previously noted, once filed, and ruled upon, the path to the appellate court was typically the filing of a notice of appeal and then a brief in support of the motion to reconsider. As outlined above, however, Rule 604(h) follows a different process. A motion for relief is a prerequisite to the filing of a notice of appeal. And a thread-bare motion for relief that fails to identify the issues and the grounds for relief, even if subsequently supported by a proper memorandum in the appellate court, will not be deemed adequate for purposes of appellate review.

As an additional point of practice, there are standardized forms for filing the notice of appeal from pretrial detention or release orders on the Illinois Supreme Court website. In completing these forms, practitioners should remember that the specific pretrial detention or release order is the subject of the Rule 604(h) appeal, as the standardized forms can be confusing in this regard. The standardized form directs the appellant to enter the name of the county from which the appeal is taken and the name of the judge who entered the order on the motion for relief. The form also requires the appellant to list the “Date of Order of Motion for Relief.” This information provides the jurisdictional facts that allow the appellate court to ensure that a prerequisite to appellate jurisdiction has been satisfied. The succeeding blanks on the form request the date(s) of the hearing on pretrial release, and these dates are the significant entries for identifying which orders are being appealed from in the motion for relief. Notably, the standardized form does not have a place to provide the date of the pretrial order of detention or release even though that is the order being appealed.

In summary, the motion for relief is a new procedural prerequisite that must be filed prior to an interlocutory appeal of an order regarding pretrial detention or release under the SAFE-T Act. The motion must contain the specific claims of error and requests for relief, along with some cohesive form of argument, to support the claims of error. References to the record, evidence, and, if possible, legal authority should be provided. Remember that “judges are not like pigs, hunting for truffles buried in briefs.” U.S. v. Dunkel, 927 F.2d 955, 956 (7th Cir. 1991) (per curiam). A reviewing court is not a “depository in which the appellant may dump the burden of argument and research.” People v. Forthenberry, 2024 IL App (5th) 231002, ¶ 43 (quoting Thrall Car Manufacturing Co. v. Lindquist, 145 Ill. App. 3d 712, 719 (1986)). Instead, reviewing courts are “entitled to have the issues clearly defined, pertinent authority cited, and a cohesive legal argument presented. Forthenberry, 2024 IL App (5th) 231002, ¶ 43. An appellant who fails to adhere to Rule 604(h) requirements risks dismissal of the appeal or a waiver of any issue not adequately raised.

Put simply, understanding the significance of the motion for relief is important for criminal law practitioners who handle pretrial detention hearings. The motion not only shapes the arguments heard in the trial court but also acts as the framework for the appeal. Furthermore, the motion is the predicate for jurisdiction on appeal.

1. The Safety, Accountability, Fairness and Equity-Today Act, commonly known as the SAFE-T Act, extensively revised article 110 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (725 ILCS 5/110-1 et seq. (West 2022)). See Pub. Act 101-652, § 10-255; see also Pub. Act 102-1104, § 70 (eff. Jan. 1, 2023) (amending various provisions of the SAFE-T Act); Rowe v. Raoul, 2023 IL 129248, ¶ 52 (lifting stay and setting effective date as September 18, 2023). The Act has also been called the Pretrial Fairness Act. Neither the SAFE-T Act nor the Pretrial Fairness Act is official as neither appears in the Public Act or the Illinois Complied Statutes.
2. Rule 604(h)(7) (eff. Apr. 15, 2024) further provides, “Whether made in the motion for relief alone or as supplemented by the memorandum, the form of the appellant’s argument must contain sufficient detail to enable meaningful appellate review, including the contentions of the appellant and the reasons therefore and citations of the record and any relevant authorities.”