People v. Lewis, 28 N.E.3d 923

Defendant Andre Lewis was indicted for first-degree murder for the May 14, 2006 shooting death of Darryl Simms; after a jury trial he was convicted and sentenced to 60 years (with a 25-year firearm enhancement).
Prosecution witnesses placed Lewis at the scene and identified him as the shooter; several eyewitnesses testified the victim was unarmed and Lewis fled in a maroon/burgundy Lumina.
Defense theory at trial: several defense witnesses said a third party ("Rico") fired the fatal shots and that Simms displayed a handgun (but none testified Lewis shot Simms); defendant did not testify.
Defense moved for a jury instruction on self-defense; the trial court refused, reasoning no defense witness testified Lewis shot Simms and the defense witnesses denied Lewis fired.
The State introduced evidence of police efforts to locate Lewis (contacts with relatives, surveillance of wife, arrest after surveillance), and argued Lewis hid from police; trial court admitted this evidence to explain delay and as circumstantial flight evidence.
Posttrial, defendant filed a pro se ineffective-assistance (Krankel) claim; the trial court conducted a preliminary inquiry, rejected the claims as strategy-based or unsupported, and denied appointment of new counsel.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Refusal to give self-defense instruction	State: instruction not warranted because defense denied that Lewis shot the victim; no evidence defendant used force	Lewis: evidence (defense witnesses) supported self-defense or at least raised it "some"	Court: No error — defendant did not admit shooting and defense witnesses said a third party fired; self-defense instruction not supported; any error harmless
Admission/argument re: flight/concealment	State: police investigative steps were relevant to explain delay in arrest and supported inference of concealment/flight	Lewis: no foundation that he knew police sought him; evidence wrongly implied flight	Court: Admission proper — jury could infer Lewis knew he was a suspect from contacts and surveillance; any error would be harmless
Krankel (posttrial ineffective-assistance) inquiry standard	State: court followed Krankel/Moore flexible preliminary-inquiry approach	Lewis: court applied wrong standard and should have appointed new counsel because some claims showed possible neglect	Court: No error — court conducted an adequate preliminary inquiry; most claims implicated trial strategy and were facially meritless
Harmlessness of any instructional/argument errors	State: even if error, verdict would stand on the weight of evidence	Lewis: errors were prejudicial	Held: Harmless beyond a reasonable doubt given the evidence favoring prosecution

People v. Jeffries, 164 Ill.2d 104 (Ill. 1995) (self-defense is an affirmative defense; prosecution must disprove when issue raised)
People v. Everette, 141 Ill.2d 147 (Ill. 1990) (defendant entitled to self-defense instruction when some evidence supports it)
People v. Lahori, 13 Ill. App.3d 572 (Ill. App. Ct. 1973) (denial that defendant knowingly killed victim is inconsistent with self-defense)
People v. Dukes, 19 Ill.2d 532 (Ill. 1960) (self-defense instruction not required where defendant denies firing and testimony is insufficient)
Krankel v. People, 102 Ill.2d 181 (Ill. 1984) (trial court must inquire into pro se ineffective-assistance claims; may appoint new counsel if claim shows possible neglect)
People v. Moore, 207 Ill.2d 68 (Ill. 2003) (Krankel clarified: preliminary inquiry may suffice; appointment of new counsel not automatic)
People v. Lewis, 165 Ill.2d 305 (Ill. 1995) (evidence of flight is circumstantial and admissible when it can be inferred defendant knew he was a suspect)
People v. Hayes, 139 Ill.2d 89 (Ill. 1990) (investigative steps and delay in arrest may be admissible to explain investigative timeline)
People v. Freeman, 149 Ill. App.3d 278 (Ill. App. Ct. 1986) (cannot combine State's evidence of defendant's act with defendant's testimony of fear to create self-defense)