People v. Brown
2017 IL App (3d) 140921
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2017Background
- Ray A. Brown, Jr. was tried by jury and convicted of domestic battery based on victim Holly Howard’s testimony and police testimony recounting statements by defendant admitting he pushed/grabbed Howard during an argument.
- Before trial the court allowed defense counsel to raise self-defense at trial (though no formal notice filed) and instructed the jury on self-defense after evidence was presented; defense counsel’s closing argued insufficiency/attacked victim credibility rather than advancing self-defense.
- After conviction defendant filed a pro se letter and counsel later moved to set aside the verdict, arguing (on defendant’s behalf) that two occurrence witnesses (Latisha Wilson and Lori Giles) were not called due to miscommunication between counsel and defendant; counsel effectively argued her own ineffectiveness in that motion.
- The trial court denied the motion and sentenced defendant to 4½ years imprisonment, orally stating "no fine," with written order boxes for fines/restoration unchecked.
- The circuit clerk later entered clerical assessments (totaling $1,020.50) on a Case Transactions Summary; defendant challenged $660 in fines and $116.50 in fees as improperly imposed by the clerk without statutory or judicial authority.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether self-defense instruction was improper given defendant’s testimony denying the act | The State argued instruction was supported by evidence (police testimony recounting defendant’s admissions) | Brown argued the instruction was improper because his testimony denied committing the battery | Court held instruction proper because State introduced defendant’s admission via Officer Jordan; instruction may be given if any slight evidence supports it, even if defendant’s testimony contradicts it |
| Whether counsel was ineffective for obtaining an instruction but not arguing self-defense at closing | State: counsel’s choices are trial strategy and not deficient | Brown: counsel’s failure to press self-defense prejudiced him | Court held counsel not ineffective for trial performance; requesting an instruction was proper and counsel’s closing strategy is protected as trial strategy; conviction affirmed |
| Whether counsel’s posttrial argument of her own ineffectiveness created a conflict of interest requiring new posttrial proceedings | State: no per se conflict and record did not show prejudice | Brown: counsel arguing her own ineffectiveness is at least an actual conflict that adversely affected representation | Court held an actual conflict existed here because counsel failed to present necessary affidavits or meaningful proof of prejudice when asserting her own ineffectiveness; vacated denial of posttrial motion and remanded for appointment of conflict-free counsel to decide and, if meritorious, raise posttrial claims |
| Whether monetary assessments entered by the circuit clerk are void/unauthorized | State argued procedural/jurisdictional objections but did not justify the assessments’ statutory authority | Brown argued clerk lacked authority to impose listed fines/fees and they must be vacated | Court vacated $660 in clerical fines and $116.50 in fees (total $776.50) imposed without authority; remanded with directions (but did not remand for imposition of fines per Castleberry) |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (established two-part ineffective assistance test)
- People v. Davis, 213 Ill. 2d 459 (instructions on inconsistent alternative defenses allowed if slight evidence supports each)
- People v. Bratcher, 63 Ill. 2d 534 (defendant entitled to benefit of any defense shown by entire evidence even if inconsistent with defendant’s testimony)
- People v. Manning, 241 Ill. 2d 319 (applying Strickland standard in Illinois)
- People v. Morales, 209 Ill. 2d 340 (actual conflict requires showing that conflict adversely affected counsel’s performance)
- People v. Enis, 194 Ill. 2d 361 (need for affidavits to establish prejudice from failure to call witnesses)
- People v. Castleberry, 2015 IL 116916 (limits on remanding for imposition of fines)