People v. Brown, 2016 IL App (4th) 140760

Anthony S. Brown pleaded guilty pursuant to a negotiated plea to armed habitual criminal and received an 18-year sentence; a home-invasion charge was nol-prossed.
Brown later filed an amended postconviction petition alleging plea counsel misadvised him about good-conduct (credit-for-time-served) eligibility, telling him he would serve 50% of the sentence rather than an 85% mandatory term.
Brown submitted an affidavit stating he relied on counsel’s erroneous advice and would not have accepted the plea had he known he had to serve 85%.
The State moved to dismiss; the trial court granted dismissal holding Brown failed to show prejudice from counsel’s alleged misinformation.
On appeal, the Fourth District reviewed de novo whether Brown made a substantial showing of a constitutional violation and analyzed conflicting appellate precedents.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether erroneous advice about good-conduct credit can support ineffective-assistance claim attacking a guilty plea	State: defendant failed to show prejudice required under Strickland and Rissley	Brown: counsel’s wrong advice induced his plea; that reliance alone merits an evidentiary hearing	Held: Following Rissley, mere assertion of reliance is insufficient; must show prejudice by claiming innocence or identifying a plausible defense; dismissal affirmed

People v. Rissley, 206 Ill. 2d 403 (Ill. 2003) (to show prejudice in guilty-plea ineffective-assistance claims, defendant must show reasonable probability he would have gone to trial and must allege innocence or a plausible defense)
People v. Stewart, 381 Ill. App. 3d 200 (Ill. App. Ct. 2008) (held erroneous advice about collateral consequences could warrant an evidentiary hearing)
People v. Pendleton, 223 Ill. 2d 458 (Ill. 2006) (standards for second-stage postconviction review)
People v. Coleman, 183 Ill. 2d 366 (Ill. 1998) (liberal construction of postconviction petitions and taking well-pleaded facts as true)