People v. Robinson, 2017 IL App (1st) 161595

On Jan. 14, 2010 defendant (Robinson) was found in victim Witherspoon’s apartment; a fight occurred and defendant bit off part of Witherspoon’s lower lip. Defendant was convicted after a bench trial of residential burglary and aggravated battery.
Defendant filed a pro se posttrial motion alleging trial counsel was ineffective; the trial court conducted a preliminary Krankel inquiry and denied relief.
On direct appeal this court remanded for a new Krankel hearing because the State’s participation had rendered the original preliminary inquiry adversarial. The matter was reheard by a different judge who again denied appointment of new counsel.
Defendant appealed the second Krankel ruling and also challenged the fines-and-fees assessment. The State agreed some fee adjustments were required.
The appellate court affirmed the denial of new counsel at the Krankel stage (finding counsel’s performance objectively reasonable and defendant’s allegations not showing possible neglect), and corrected the fines-and-fees order, reducing the amount owed to $285 after vacating unauthorized violent-victim fines and applying presentence credit to certain fines.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (People)	Defendant's Argument (Robinson)	Held
Whether the trial court should have appointed new counsel after the second preliminary Krankel inquiry	The trial court properly conducted the preliminary inquiry, relied on counsel’s explanations and the record, and need not appoint new counsel unless claims show possible neglect	Counsel neglected the case by (1) failing to locate/call “Wanda,” the woman with defendant at the scene, and (2) failing to interview/call arresting officers who might show the victim knew Wanda	Denied. Court found defendant’s allegations were conclusory or speculative, counsel investigated reasonably under the circumstances, and trial strategy/existing record addressed impeachment points; no showing of possible neglect requiring new counsel.
Whether the fines/fees order must be corrected on remand	State agreed to correct earlier miscalculations and remove unauthorized charges	Defendant argued additional fines imposed on remand were unauthorized or ex post facto, and that his $5/day pre-sentence credit should offset additional fines (State Police ops fee and court systems fee)	Modified. Vacated $20 and $100 violent-crime-victim fines (statutorily unauthorized/ex post facto), applied presentence $5/day credit to the $15 State Police operations and $50 court systems charges (held to be fines), and set total owed at $285.

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes two-prong ineffective assistance test)
People v. Albanese, 104 Ill. 2d 504 (Illinois adoption of Strickland standard)
People v. Moore, 207 Ill. 2d 68 (Krankel framework: when preliminary inquiry must lead to appointment of new counsel)
People v. Chapman, 194 Ill. 2d 186 (Krankel and subsequent guidance on handling pro se ineffective-assistance claims)
People v. Guest, 166 Ill. 2d 381 (reasonableness/deference to counsel’s investigative choices)
People v. Jones, 223 Ill. 2d 569 (distinguishing fines from fees; analytical factors for characterization)