People v. Carr
407 Ill. App. 3d 513
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2011Background
- Keith Carr pleaded guilty to aggravated kidnapping on October 24, 2007 and received a six-year sentence.
- Carr did not file a timely notice of appeal from the conviction.
- In 2008 Carr sought court records and transcripts, prompting appointment of counsel to investigate postconviction relief viability.
- Counsel filed a Rule 651(c) certificate and sought to withdraw; court allowed withdrawal and informed Carr he could file a pro se petition.
- Carr filed a pro se postconviction petition on April 21, 2009 asserting ineffective assistance of counsel and lack of admonition regarding 85% sentencing consequences.
- Trial court dismissed the petition on June 12, 2009; Carr appealed, consolidated with a related case.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the postconviction petition was validly filed | Carr argues he stated a constitutional violation and sought relief under the Act. | People contend the petition failed due to noncompliance with notarization and section 122-2 requirements. | Petition properly dismissed for lack of notarized affidavit and lack of supporting evidence. |
| Whether notarization of the affidavit was required under the Act | Niezgoda/notarization constraint should not bar relief under 122-1(b). | Notarization is required for affidavits under the Act. | Notarization required; petition invalid without notarized affidavit. |
| Whether the petition could be saved under section 122-2 by evidence | Allegations of ineffective assistance and lack of admonition supported by record. | Record silent on attorney’s preplea advice; concerns are not proven by affidavits. | Petition properly dismissed for failure to attach or support with affidavits/evidence. |
| Whether trial court had to admonish about 85% sentence requirement | Defendant was not properly advised of collateral consequences; due process violated. | Court did not admonish 85% consequence; plea could be infirm. | Trial court was not required to inform about collateral consequences; no relief on this basis. |
| Whether the record supports ineffective assistance of counsel claim | Counsel pressured guilty plea despite potential defense. | Record is silent on counsel’s specific advice; cannot infer ineffective assistance. | Record silent; cannot grant relief on ineffective-assistance grounds. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Tenner, 175 Ill.2d 372 (1997) (standard for postconviction review)
- People v. Niezgoda, 337 Ill. App.3d 593 (2003) (notarization requirement applies to postconviction affidavits)
- People v. Delton, 227 Ill.2d 247 (2007) (procedural dismissal for noncompliant petitions)
- People v. Johnson, 183 Ill.2d 176 (1998) (evidentiary standard for postconviction petitions)
- People v. Castano, 392 Ill.App.3d 956 (2009) (collateral consequences need not be explained at plea)
- People v. Frison, 365 Ill.App.3d 932 (2006) (collateral consequences not direct consequences for plea)
- Roth v. Illinois Farmers Ins. Co., 202 Ill.2d 490 (2002) (affidavits must be notarized unless specific exception)
- Robidoux v. Oliphant, 201 Ill.2d 324 (2002) (exception to notarization rule)