People v. Harris
998 N.E.2d 618
Ill. App. Ct.2013Background
- Harris was convicted by a jury of two murders, one attempted murder, and aggravated battery with a firearm, and was sentenced to death (later commuted to natural life).
- He filed a postconviction petition in 2008; the circuit court dismissed it, and the death sentence had been commuted during the pendency of reconsideration.
- Harris waived counsel and represented himself starting October 2001 for about a year, after which counsel were appointed for trial; a fitness/competency evaluation was conducted.
- Eye-witnesses Helen and Christina identified Harris as the shooter; physical and ballistic evidence linked Harris to a .40-caliber Glock and to ammunition used in the crime.
- Sarelli supplied information leading to Harris’s gun, and he had access to a Glock handgun prior to the shootings; other witnesses provided background leads.
- Janeway later recanted her pretrial identification; Harris argued this was Brady material and that trial counsel were ineffective for not presenting related evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Brady violation due to recantation | Harris claims Janeway’s recantation was suppressed | State contends not material or exculpatory | No substantial Brady violation shown |
| Ineffective assistance for not presenting Janeway evidence | Counsel should have presented Janeway’s recantation | Recantation not exculpatory or material; would not change outcome | No ineffective assistance shown |
| Ineffective assistance re two-shooter theory and related statements | Counsel failed to pursue two-shooter theory and witness statements | Evidence did not exclude Harris as shooter; theories speculative | No reasonable probability of different outcome; no prejudice |
| Competence to waive counsel and fitness to stand trial | Affidavits show cognitive impairments; bona fide doubt about fitness | Harris was competent; waiver knowingly made; no fitness hearing required | No bona fide doubt; competent to waive; no fitness hearing required |
Key Cases Cited
- Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (U.S. 1963) (favorable evidence must be disclosed material to guilt or punishment)
- Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419 (U.S. 1995) (duty to disclose evidence weighs on net effect on trial outcome)
- Bagley v. United States, 473 U.S. 667 (U.S. 1985) (materiality standard for exculpatory evidence)
- People v. Easley, Ill. 2d 307 (Ill. 2000) (fitness to stand trial and due process principles)
- People v. Lego, 168 Ill. 2d 561 (Ill. 1995) (competency to represent oneself; Faretta considerations)
- Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (U.S. 1975) (pro se defense must be knowingly and intelligently chosen)