People v. Richey
2017 IL App (3d) 150321
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2017Background
- In 2001 Jason D. Richey was charged with first-degree murder after confessing to police and pled guilty pursuant to a negotiated plea, receiving a 45-year sentence. He did not file a direct appeal.
- Richey had documented mental-health diagnoses (major depressive disorder, borderline personality traits), prior psychiatric treatment, and was on psychotropic medication; his public defender had sought a fitness exam before trial.
- In 2004 Richey filed a pro se postconviction petition alleging trial counsel was ineffective for failing to move to suppress his confession because he was medicated and allegedly coerced by police threats regarding return to his treatment facility.
- This court (Richey I) held the petition was not frivolous and remanded for appointment of counsel to amend the petition, noting Dr. Zoot’s prior report suggested mental-health issues could have affected statements to police.
- Appointed postconviction counsel obtained a retroactive evaluation from Dr. Zoot focused on Richey’s capacity to waive Miranda rights; Dr. Zoot could not opine conclusively whether Richey knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his rights in 2001.
- Postconviction counsel moved to withdraw; the trial court granted withdrawal and later granted the State’s motion to dismiss. Richey appealed, challenging counsel’s withdrawal as improper under the standard described in People v. Kuehner.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Richey) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether appointed postconviction counsel properly moved to withdraw at second-stage after court had found petition non-frivolous | Counsel could withdraw because the expert could not support the suppression claim; remaining claims speculative and meritless | Counsel’s withdrawal was improper because counsel failed to address or justify rejection of the specific pro se suppression claim (medication and coercion); counsel’s role was to refine, not abandon, claims | Court reversed: counsel’s motion to withdraw was inadequate under Kuehner; remand for new counsel and further second-stage proceedings |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Greer, 212 Ill. 2d 192 (Ill. 2004) (describing postconviction review framework)
- People v. Hodges, 234 Ill. 2d 1 (Ill. 2009) (frivolous-or-patently-without-merit standard explained)
- People v. Pendleton, 223 Ill. 2d 458 (Ill. 2006) (second-stage standard and de novo review on dismissal)
- People v. Kuehner, 2015 IL 117695 (Ill. 2015) (appointed counsel must explain why each advanced pro se claim is meritless before withdrawing)
- People v. Price, 2016 IL 118613 (Ill. 2016) (retroactivity principle for state-court decisions on collateral review)