People v. Gutierrez
352 Ill. Dec. 505
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2011Background
- Gutierrez indicted on eight counts of first-degree murder for Isidro Rodriguez’s death on Nov. 2, 2003.
- At Rule 402 conference, Gutierrez chose to plead guilty to one count; court explained rights and penalties and the State provided a factual basis for the plea.
- Court sentenced Gutierrez to 35 years, with remaining counts dismissed; defendant was advised to seek permission to vacate the judgment within 30 days to appeal.
- Gutierrez did not appeal; in 2007 he filed a pro se postconviction petition which was denied as frivolous, with $155 in costs, including a $50 State’s Attorney fee under 4-2002.1.
- On June 30, 2009 Gutierrez sought leave to file a successive postconviction petition, alleging ineffective assistance for failing to discuss immigration consequences and claiming the plea was not knowingly/voluntarily entered due to the court’s failure to inform about deportation; the circuit court denied leave for lack of cause and prejudice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Gutierrez showed cause and prejudice to file a successive petition on immigration-deportation claims. | Gutierrez (State) argues procedural failure to raise issues earlier; cause and prejudice shown. | Gutierrez claims he was unaware of deportation consequences and counsel failed to inform him. | Yes for cause; no prejudice due to lack of showing that he would have prevailed at trial. |
| Whether Padilla v. Kentucky applies to establish prejudice under Strickland. | Defense argues Padilla requires relief for deportation risk. | State contends Padilla is not retroactive. | Padilla governs deficient performance; prejudice analysis deferred to Strickland and not retroactivity. |
| Whether the trial court’s failure to admonish about immigration consequences violated section 113-8 and affected voluntariness. | Failure to admonish is a due-process issue under section 113-8. | Delvillar held such admonishments are not constitutional violations; immigration consequences are collateral. | Delvillar controls; failure to admonish does not render plea involuntary or cognizable in postconviction proceeding. |
| Whether Padilla’s reasoning should alter Teague retroactivity analysis in this case. | Padilla should apply, potentially retroactive. | Padilla not a new retroactive rule under Teague. | Padilla is not a new rule; Teague retroactivity analysis applied; not retroactive to bar the claim. |
| Whether the $50 State’s Attorney fee was improperly imposed and should be vacated. | Fees were improperly imposed because the State was not involved at the first-stage dismissal. | Fee properly imposed under 4-2002.1. | Vacate the $50 fee; the trial court’s fee imposition was void. |
Key Cases Cited
- Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. __ (2010) (establishes counsel must inform about deportation risk; not cited here due to reporter unavailable in official report format)
- Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (1989) (retroactivity threshold for new criminal-procedure rules in collateral review)
- Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (1985) (Strickland prejudice analysis applies to guilty-plea challenges)
- Flowers v. People, 138 Ill.2d 218 (1990) (Teague framework adopted in Illinois for collateral-review claims)
- Delvillar v. People, 235 Ill.2d 507 (2009) (immigration consequences are collateral; 113-8 admonitions not constitutional violations; voluntariness focus)
- Pitsonbarger v. People, 205 Ill.2d 444 (2002) (cause-and-prejudice standard for successive postconviction petitions)