2025 IL App (4th) 241041-U
Ill. App. Ct.2025Background
- MarQuis Costic was convicted in 2014 of first degree murder, aggravated battery with a firearm, and mob action arising out of a shooting in Peoria, Illinois.
- The conviction was largely based on eyewitness testimony and the statements of a jailhouse informant; no physical evidence directly tied Costic to the shooting.
- Costic filed a postconviction petition presenting, among other materials, an affidavit from his brother Michael (a codefendant), asserting he acted alone during the shooting and Costic was not involved.
- The trial court dismissed Costic's postconviction petition at the second stage, finding the claims were refuted by the trial record and/or forfeited.
- On appeal, Costic challenged the summary dismissal, arguing substantial claims of actual innocence and ineffective assistance, specifically for counsel's failure to call an alibi witness.
- The appellate court reviewed whether Costic's petition should advance to a third-stage evidentiary hearing on these claims.
Issues
| Issue | Costic's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Actual innocence claim (Michael's affidavit) | Michael Costic’s affidavit was newly discovered, exonerating evidence | Evidence at trial (eyewitnesses/informant) refuted Michael's affidavit | Costic showed a substantial claim; claim advances to third stage |
| Ineffective assistance for not calling Evans | Counsel failed to interview/call an alibi witness, which was prejudicial | No prejudice; Evans’s affidavit not exonerating or her presence unhelpful | Costic made a substantial showing; claim advances to third stage |
| Ineffective assistance for not calling other witnesses | Counsel failed to investigate/interview others who could exonerate him | Testimony from others would not have exonerated Costic | No substantial showing; dismissal affirmed |
| Ineffective assistance for not impeaching witness | Counsel inadequately impeached jailhouse informant Hanneman | Counsel's impeachment was sufficient and strategic | No substantial showing; dismissal affirmed |
| Unreasonable assistance of postconviction counsel | Postconviction counsel failed to obtain affidavits/show authenticity | Counsel complied with Rule 651(c); efforts presumed reasonable | No unreasonable assistance; dismissal affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (established the two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- People v. Robinson, 2020 IL 123849 (standard for actual innocence claims in Illinois postconviction proceedings)
- People v. Steidl, 177 Ill. 2d 239 (failure to interview witnesses known to counsel may indicate incompetence)
- People v. Makiel, 358 Ill. App. 3d 102 (defense counsel’s failure to call witnesses can constitute ineffective assistance)
--- Summary: The Illinois appellate court reversed in part a trial court’s dismissal of MarQuis Costic’s postconviction petition, finding substantial showings for claims of actual innocence (based on a co-defendant's affidavit) and ineffective counsel (for not calling an alibi witness), requiring an evidentiary hearing. Other claims regarding witness impeachment, testimony of other potential witnesses, and postconviction counsel's performance were appropriately dismissed.