People v. Clark
2011 IL App (2d) 100188
Ill. App. Ct.2011Background
- Clark was charged with multiple offenses for stabbing his girlfriend Akela Dillon; Dillon obtained an order of protection against him.
- Clark underwent a fitness evaluation ordered in Oct 2006; by Nov 2006 his public defender withdrew the fitness issue as not in doubt.
- On Jan 10, 2007 Clark pleaded guilty to attempted murder in a negotiated plea for a 12-year sentence, with the factual basis stating Dillon would testify about his schizophrenia and noncompliance with meds.
- Dillon provided an affidavit stating Clark was not taking meds and heard voices; she would testify that his mental condition prompted the crime and that counsel did not contact her.
- Clark filed a pro se postconviction petition in Apr 2008 alleging ineffective assistance for failure to investigate an insanity defense and not calling Dillon; Dillon corroborated the insanity defense; the court dismissed the petition at second stage; on appeal, Clark argues for reversal and remand.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial counsel’s failure to investigate insanity defense was ineffective | Clark | Peccarelli | Reversed and remanded for evidentiary hearing |
| Whether Dillon’s affidavit suffices to support a viable insanity defense at second stage | Clark | State | Remand to determine credibility and consider evidence at hearing |
| Whether postconviction counsel's handling forfeited the claim, and whether prejudice exists in plea context | Clark | State | Not forfeited; potential prejudice shown; remand needed to address merits |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (Supreme Court, 1984) (establishes two-prong deficient performance and prejudice standard)
- Bell v. United States, 152 Ill. App. 3d 1007 (1st Dist. 1987) (counsel's failure to interview available witnesses may be ineffective)
- Dwight v. State, 368 Ill. App. 3d 873 (1st Dist. 2006) (lay testimony can support insanity determinations; credibility not determined at second stage)
- Morris v. State, 335 Ill. App. 3d 70 (2d Dist. 2002) (failure to present available witnesses can constitute ineffective assistance)
- Hall v. Clark, 217 Ill. 2d 324 (2005) (affidavit requirements limited to first stage; credibility resolved at hearing)
- Coleman v. Illinois, 183 Ill. 2d 366 (1998) (establishes two-stage postconviction framework)
- Edwards v. State, 197 Ill. 2d 239 (2001) (defines limited initial-stage review and scope)
- Barkes v. Illinois, 399 Ill. App. 3d 980 (2010) (affidavit requirements addressed at stage progression)