People v. Ayres
2017 IL 120071
| Ill. | 2017Background
- In April 2013 Qwantrell Ayres pled guilty to aggravated battery and received a 12‑month conditional discharge with travel restrictions; the State later petitioned to revoke when he left Illinois without permission.
- Ayres admitted the violation; at sentencing (Sept. 4, 2013) conflicting testimony about advice to leave the state was presented and the court imposed seven years’ imprisonment.
- On Sept. 26, 2013 counsel filed a motion to reconsider; Ayres mailed a pro se posttrial petition to withdraw his guilty plea and vacate sentence alleging only “ineffective assistance of counsel.”
- The court held a hearing on counsel’s motion without Ayres present, denied the motion, and did not address Ayres’s pro se petition or conduct any inquiry into the ineffective‑assistance claim.
- The appellate court affirmed, holding the four‑word allegation lacked factual support and did not trigger a preliminary Krankel inquiry; the Illinois Supreme Court granted leave and reversed, remanding for a Krankel inquiry.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a bare pro se posttrial assertion “ineffective assistance of counsel” triggers the trial court’s duty to conduct a preliminary Krankel inquiry | The State: a bare, unsupported allegation is insufficient; defendant must identify counsel and provide supporting facts or specific claims | Ayres: any clear posttrial assertion of ineffective assistance, oral or written, is enough to trigger the court’s duty to inquire so the defendant can flesh out facts | The Court: A clear posttrial claim of ineffective assistance (oral or written), even without supporting facts, triggers the duty to conduct a Krankel inquiry; remanded for that inquiry |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Krankel, 102 Ill.2d 181 (Ill. 1984) (established procedure requiring inquiry and possible appointment of new counsel when defendant raises posttrial pro se ineffective assistance claim)
- People v. Moore, 207 Ill.2d 68 (Ill. 2003) (trial court must inquire into the factual basis, if any, of a pro se posttrial ineffective‑assistance claim)
- People v. Taylor, 237 Ill.2d 68 (Ill. 2010) (discussed sufficiency of pro se claims and limits of Krankel when allegations are vague)
- People v. Banks, 237 Ill.2d 154 (Ill. 2010) (Krankel inquiry requirement and permissible scope of court and counsel interchange)
- People v. Ramey, 152 Ill.2d 41 (Ill. 1992) (Krankel jurisprudence framing trial court’s duty to inquire)
- People v. Williams, 147 Ill.2d 173 (Ill. 1992) (same)
- People v. Nitz, 143 Ill.2d 82 (Ill. 1991) (same)
- People v. Jocko, 239 Ill.2d 87 (Ill. 2010) (Krankel’s purpose to facilitate trial court consideration and create appellate record)