People v. Nieto-Roman, 2019 IL App (4th) 180807

Defendant Jose Nieto-Roman was charged with multiple counts arising from the October 31, 2014 death of eight‑month‑old E.A.F.; he pleaded guilty to one count of first‑degree murder under a plea agreement capping sentence at 50 years and dismissing remaining counts.
At plea hearing defendant admitted the factual basis: infant died of acute blunt head trauma, skull fracture, fractured ribs, burns, cocaine intoxication; defendant acknowledged he and the infant had cocaine in their systems.
After sentencing to 50 years, defendant filed multiple postplea motions alleging innocence (claiming the mother, Ember, killed the infant), involuntary plea, and ineffective assistance (including counsel’s failure to move to suppress custodial statements recorded in an ambulance and later at the jail).
At the evidentiary hearing defendant and his brother Edgar testified Ember admitted she killed the baby; Ember denied those statements and contradicted other defense assertions; police testified recorded ambulance and November jail interviews were made after Miranda warnings and waivers.
The trial court found the ambulance statements voluntary, rejected defendant’s credibility and innocence claims, and denied motions to withdraw the plea and to reconsider sentence; defendant appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a “defense worthy of consideration” alone justifies withdrawal of a guilty plea	Illinois Supreme Court no longer treats that phrase as an independent basis; Morreale’s language has been superseded	That he had such a defense (Ember confessed) and thus plea should be withdrawn	Court: Supreme Court no longer recognizes that standalone basis; even if it did, defendant did not present such a defense
Whether defendant raised a reasonable doubt as to guilt warranting plea withdrawal	Credibility findings favor State; defendant’s hearing testimony conflicts with prior statements and other evidence	Testimony from defendant and his brother about Ember’s alleged admissions creates reasonable doubt	Court: No abuse of discretion—trial court reasonably discredited defense testimony and found no doubt of guilt
Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to move to suppress ambulance custodial statements	Even if those statements would be suppressed, defendant cannot show prejudice because November jail statements (waived) and other evidence would remain	Failure to file suppression motion deprived defendant of effective assistance and altered plea decision/outcome	Court: No prejudice under Strickland—other admissible statements and circumstantial evidence make a different outcome not reasonably probable; claim fails

People v. Hughes, 983 N.E.2d 439 (Ill. 2012) (standards and discretion for plea‑withdrawal motions)
People v. Delvillar, 922 N.E.2d 330 (Ill. 2009) (appellate review of discretionary plea withdrawal rulings)
People v. Morreale, 107 N.E.2d 721 (Ill. 1952) (older formulation listing "defense worthy of consideration")
People v. Pugh, 623 N.E.2d 255 (Ill. 1993) (supreme court decisions narrowing Morreale language)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two‑prong ineffective assistance standard)
People v. Evans, 708 N.E.2d 1158 (Ill. 1999) (application of Strickland in Illinois)
People v. Patterson, 25 N.E.3d 526 (Ill. 2014) (prejudice analysis when counsel fails to file suppression motion)