People v. Lofton
2011 IL App (1st) 100118
Ill. App. Ct.2011Background
- Lofton charged with two counts of first-degree murder; after hung jury at first trial, convicted at a second trial and sentenced to 50 years.
- Direct appeal affirmed; Lofton later pursued multiple postconviction petitions, including a second petition filed April 16, 2004, with counsel-appointed and supplemental petition in 2008.
- Second petition alleged actual innocence based on newly discovered evidence: an affidavit from Antonio Walker (a/k/a Fountain) who claimed to be the actual shooter and stated Lofton was not present.
- Walker was acquitted at Lofton’s trial and signed an affidavit in 2007 asserting he was shooter and Lofton not there, contradicting key trial testimonies.
- The circuit court dismissed the petition as barred by cause-and-prejudice, prompting Lofton to appeal; the appellate court reversed and remanded for a third-stage evidentiary hearing, finding an actual-innocence claim present.
- The court addressed whether the actual-innocence claim was properly considered at second stage and whether the Walker affidavit constitutes newly discovered, material, and likely-to-change-the-result evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether actual innocence is exempt from the cause-and-prejudice requirement. | Lofton: actual-innocence claim should bypass cause-and-prejudice. | State: the cause-and-prejudice framework may apply; if not, Walker’s credibility is a matter for the evidentiary stage. | Actual innocence excused from cause-and-prejudice; merits to be considered. |
| Whether Walker's affidavit is newly discovered evidence. | Lofton: Walker’s admission could not have been discovered earlier despite acquittal. | State: Walker’s potential testimony was available and not newly discovered. | Yes, Walker’s affidavit constitutes newly discovered evidence. |
| Whether Walker's affidavit is material and not merely cumulative. | Walker’s statements add independently relevant exculpatory information. | The affidavit would be cumulative or duplicative of prior evidence. | Material and not merely cumulative. |
| Whether the newly discovered evidence would likely change the result at retrial. | Walker’s account could exonerate Lofton and impair Fisher/Foster testimonies. | Reconciling other testimonies would likely sustain conviction. | Yes, likely to change the result; warrants third-stage evidentiary hearing. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Pitsonbarger, 205 Ill. 2d 444 (Il. 2002) (fundamental fairness allows successive petitions if cause-and-prejudice satisfied; governs when actual innocence exception applied)
- People v. Morgan, 212 Ill. 2d 148 (Il. 2004) (defines cause-and-prejudice standard and application to postconviction petitions)
- People v. Ortiz, 235 Ill. 2d 319 (Il. 2009) (actual innocence excused from cause-and-prejudice; vice-versa when not death penalty cases)
- People v. Anderson, 375 Ill. App. 3d 121 (Il. App. 2006) (discusses approach to cause-and-prejudice in postconviction context)
- People v. English, 403 Ill. App. 3d 121 (Il. App. 2010) (reiterates that not every purported actual-innocence claim qualifies; analyze facial validity)
- People v. Coleman, 183 Ill. 2d 366 (Il. 1998) (establishes standard that hearings follow substantial showing of constitutional violation)
- People v. Pendleton, 223 Ill. 2d 458 (Il. 2006) (recognizes three-stage postconviction process and standard at stages)