2012 IL App (1st) 100527
Ill. App. Ct.2012Background
- Jones was convicted of two counts of armed robbery after a bench trial, receiving two concurrent 30-year terms plus a 15-year firearm enhancement.
- Two eyewitnesses identified Jones in a photo array, and one witness identified him in a physical lineup as the nail-salon robber.
- Jones moved to suppress identifications, contending the pretrial procedures were suggestive; the trial court denied the motion.
- Witnesses Peeples and Green viewed a seven-year-old photo of Jones; both provided similar descriptions and identified Jones in the photo array and later in lineups.
- Jones filed a pro se posttrial motion for ineffective assistance of counsel; the court conducted a Krankel-like inquiry and denied relief.
- On appeal, the court vacated the sentences and remanded for resentencing after courts addressed the Hauschild/Clemons issue regarding proportional penalties.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether pretrial identifications were impermissibly suggestive | People argued procedures were reliable under totality of circumstances | Jones contends procedures were unnecessarily suggestive and violate due process | No reversible error; identifications admissible under totality of circumstances |
| Whether Krankel procedure adequately reviewed posttrial claims | Jones asserts trial court failed to properly evaluate Krankel claims | Moore/Nitz standards require adequate inquiry or appointment of new counsel if warranted | Adequate inquiry; no remand for new counsel |
| Whether firearm enhancement violates proportionate penalties | State contends enhancement valid under statute | Hauschild violation; proportional penalties issue on appeal | Remand for resentencing consistent with pre-amendment statute; Hauschild-Clemons applied |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Denton, 329 Ill. App. 3d 246 (2002) (reliability factors for lineups; admissibility depends on totality of circumstances)
- Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188 (1972) (six-factor test for identifying reliability in pretrial identifications)
- People v. Krankel, 102 Ill. 2d 181 (1984) (pretrial inquiry required to determine if appointing new counsel warranted)
- People v. Nitz, 143 Ill. 2d 82 (1991) (interpretation of Krankel procedures; when counsel should be appointed)
- People v. Moore, 207 Ill. 2d 68 (2003) (procedures for evaluating pro se posttrial claims of ineffective assistance)
- People v. Hauschild, 226 Ill. 2d 63 (2007) (proportional penalties for armed robbery with firearm; Hauschild rule)
- People v. Clemons, 2012 IL 107821 (2012) (reaffirmed Hauschild analysis; remand guidance for resentencing when necessary)
- People v. Christy, 139 Ill. 2d 172 (1990) (timeliness of raising penalty challenges; arguments may be raised after conviction)