People v. Johnson
2017 IL App (4th) 160449
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2017Background
- Granville S. Johnson was convicted of first-degree murder and attempted first-degree murder in 2009 and sentenced to consecutive lengthy terms; direct appeals and certiorari were denied.
- In April 2014 Johnson (through privately retained counsel) filed a postconviction petition claiming trial counsel was ineffective for not moving to reconsider a continuance granted so the State could obtain DNA evidence (arguing new lab report showed lack of State diligence).
- The trial court summarily dismissed the petition (res judicata/forfeiture and merit grounds). Johnson filed a timely pro se motion to reconsider alleging retained postconviction counsel was ineffective for failing to add additional claims (ineffective assistance of appellate/trial counsel on several issues).
- After counsel withdrew and OSAD was appointed on appeal, Johnson filed supplemental pro se materials. The trial court refused to consider new claims raised in the motion to reconsider, finding them forfeited because they were not in the original petition.
- Johnson appealed, arguing the court should have relaxed the forfeiture rule because his retained postconviction counsel provided unreasonable assistance at the first stage by omitting the additional claims; he asked the court to remand to second-stage proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (People) | Defendant's Argument (Johnson) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a prisoner represented by privately retained counsel is entitled to "reasonable assistance" at the first (summary-dismissal) stage of postconviction proceedings | The Act and precedent do not create a right to reasonable assistance at first stage; permitting one would create disparate treatment and conflict with statute | Retained-counsel clients should get reasonable assistance at first stage; Cotto and other authority suggest parity between retained and appointed counsel | A prisoner is not entitled to reasonable assistance at the first stage; court follows Kegel and Garcia-Rocha reasoning and declines to extend Cotto beyond its holding |
| Whether the trial court erred by refusing to consider new claims raised in Johnson’s pro se motion to reconsider (claims omitted by retained postconviction counsel) | Claims not raised in the original petition are forfeited under the Act; remedy is successive petition with leave | Forfeiture should be relaxed where retained counsel’s unreasonable omissions deprived petitioner of claims; trial court should review whether omitted claims state gist of meritorious claim | Trial court did not err: new claims were forfeited and defendant was not entitled to first-stage reasonable-assistance protection; affirm dismissal |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Kegel, 392 Ill. App. 3d 538 (Ill. App. Ct. 2009) (rejected imposition of reasonable-assistance standard on retained counsel at first-stage postconviction proceedings)
- People v. Mitchell, 189 Ill. 2d 312 (Ill. 2000) (reviewed retained counsel’s performance under reasonable-assistance standard in death-penalty context)
- People v. Ligon, 239 Ill. 2d 94 (Ill. 2010) (no right to appointed counsel at summary-dismissal stage)
- Brisbon v. People, 164 Ill. 2d 236 (Ill. 1995) (right to counsel at first stage for capital defendants under earlier statutory scheme)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)