2012 IL App (4th) 090656
Ill. App. Ct.2012Background
- Defendant Ricky Patterson was convicted in 2003 of first degree murder, arson, and concealment of a homicide based on the 2002 killing of Derrick Prout.
- Defendant sought DNA testing under 725 ILCS 5/116-3 and also filed a pro se postconviction petition.
- Counsel was appointed to represent him on postconviction; amended petition included a section 116-3 claim but no evidence was presented for it.
- Trial court denied the 116-3 request in a May 29, 2009 order after considering the amended petition.
- Appellate court reversed in part, holding counsel’s handling created a procedural bar and defendant was entitled to reasonable assistance to develop the 116-3 claim.
- Remand to determine whether defendant can satisfy 116-3 requirements and identity was an issue at trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Right to counsel for 116-3 motion | People argues no right to counsel for 116-3 | Patterson argues he had a right since the claim was in the petition | Remand; entitlement to counsel for 116-3 claims exists. |
| Application of Love to 116-3 proceedings | Love controls and denies counsel for 116-3 | Facts are distinguishable; Love not controlling | Love inapplicable; apply 651(c) considerations. |
| Counsel’s amendment creating a procedural bar | Counsel’s amendments complied; no bar | Counsel’s actions created procedural bar by not presenting 116-3 evidence | Counsel’s conduct created a procedural bar to 116-3 relief. |
| Rule 651(c) duties and reasonable assistance | Counsel complied with 651(c) | Counsel failed to present 116-3 evidence/arguments | Counsel's failure to present 116-3 evidence violated 651(c); unreasonable assistance. |
| Remand on 116-3 merits | Court should decide 116-3 on the merits | Record insufficient to decide 116-3; need prima facie showing | Remand to determine whether 116-3 requirements and identity issue are met. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Love, 312 Ill. App. 3d 424 (2000) (no statutory right to counsel for 116-3 movant unless provided by law)
- People v. Jennings, 345 Ill. App. 3d 265 (2003) (definite duties to provide counsel in postconviction proceedings)
- People v. Broughton, 344 Ill. App. 3d 232 (2003) (unreasonable assistance when routine amendments are not made to overcome bar)
- People v. Turner, 187 Ill. 2d 406 (1999) (waiver implications of electing self-representation vs. counsel in postconviction)
- People v. Williams, 23 Ill. App. 3d 988 (1974) (when a motion is treated as postconviction, counsel duties apply under Rule 651)