People v. Meyers
65 N.E.3d 961
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2016Background
- Michael Meyers was convicted of two counts of first-degree murder for a 1989 shooting and sentenced to natural life; conviction was previously affirmed on direct appeal.
- Postconviction proceedings alleged (1) newly discovered evidence (a juvenile eyewitness recantation) and (2) ineffective assistance of trial counsel George Nichols for failing to interview/call alibi witness Sherrie Parker; the recantation claim was rejected earlier and the ineffective-assistance claim proceeded after remand.
- Parker provided a sworn affidavit asserting Meyers was at her apartment near the time of the shooting; at the postconviction evidentiary hearing her testimony contained inconsistencies about the time and details, and she admitted daily drug use in 1989.
- Trial records showed Nichols listed Parker as a potential witness and issued a subpoena; Nichols is deceased, so parties relied on testimony, investigator notes, and postconviction counsel interviews to reconstruct trial preparation.
- The trial court found Nichols was aware of Parker and concluded his decision not to call her was a matter of trial strategy; the court denied postconviction relief. Meyers appealed arguing (1) trial court erred by excluding interview notes of a law student (Weiss) and (2) postconviction counsel was ineffective for not calling Weiss to authenticate the notes.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Meyers) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admission of Weiss's notes | Exclusion proper due to lack of foundation/authentication | Notes should have been admitted to show Nichols did not interview Parker and impeach Leeming | Trial court did not err; notes unauthenticated so exclusion proper |
| Postconviction counsel failure to call Weiss | No prejudice because notes would not change strategic finding | Counsel unreasonably failed to call Weiss to authenticate notes; prejudiced Meyers | No prejudicial error; failure to call Weiss not outcome-determinative |
| Ineffective assistance of trial counsel for not calling Parker | Nichols reasonably strategized not to call Parker given risk of rebuttal by defendant's postarrest statements | Failure to interview/call Parker fell below reasonable standard and prejudiced defense | Court found decision not to call Parker was strategic; ineffective-assistance claim denied |
| Manifestly erroneous review of denial of petition | Trial court's factual findings are supported and deserve deference | Trial court erred; credibility and documentary evidence would have changed result | Affirmed: denial of postconviction petition is not manifestly erroneous |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- People v. Childress, 191 Ill. 2d 168 (Ill. 2000) (deference and standard of review for postconviction evidentiary hearing denials)
- People v. Flores, 153 Ill. 2d 264 (Ill. 1992) (postconviction counsel entitled to reasonable assistance under the Act)
- People v. Lander, 215 Ill. 2d 577 (Ill. 2005) (right to counsel in postconviction proceedings is statutory)
- People v. Donoho, 204 Ill. 2d 159 (Ill. 2003) (abuse of discretion standard for evidentiary rulings)
- People v. Alsup, 373 Ill. App. 3d 745 (Ill. App. Ct.) (necessity of authentication for admission of documentary evidence)
- People v. Perkins, 229 Ill. 2d 34 (Ill. 2007) (standard that counsel must provide reasonable assistance under the Act)
- People v. Young, 263 Ill. App. 3d 627 (Ill. App. Ct. 1994) (prior appeal addressing facts of the underlying homicide)