2024 IL App (4th) 230690-U
Ill. App. Ct.2024Background
- Ernest D. Starks was convicted of child pornography and aggravated criminal sexual assault of a minor, E.S., following a jury trial in Peoria County, Illinois.
- The original conviction included sentences of 22 and 23 years for each conviction, respectively.
- On first appeal, the appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial due to improper admonishment about sentencing ranges affecting Starks’ jury trial waiver.
- After remand, Starks sought pro se representation multiple times, requested different counsel, and attempted to substitute judges, all of which were denied; jury trial reconvicted him.
- At resentencing, the trial court increased his sentences to 28 and 29 years, citing his perceived lack of remorse and confrontational attitude post-remand.
- On appeal, Starks argued the court erred in denying his pro se request, failing a proper Krankel inquiry, denying substitution of judge for cause, and increasing his sentence after remand.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Denial of request to proceed pro se | Starks’ request was a delay tactic | Request was clear, unequivocal, not for delay | No abuse of discretion; denial was proper |
| Adequacy of Krankel inquiry | Trial court’s inquiry sufficient, State's input minimal | Inquiry was inadequate, State influenced court | Inquiry was adequate; no error |
| Substitution of judge for cause | No tangible prejudice or animosity shown | Judge displayed bias, hostile comments | No clear error; claim forfeited |
| Increased sentence after remand | Starks’ attitude post-remand justified enhancement | Only conduct was exercising the right to trial | Increase was improper; old sentence reinstated |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Krankel, 102 Ill. 2d 181 (Ill. 1984) (establishing procedure for handling pro se ineffective assistance claims)
- People v. Baez, 241 Ill. 2d 44 (Ill. 2011) (defining standards for waiver of counsel/pro se representation)
- People v. Fern, 189 Ill. 2d 48 (Ill. 1999) (appellate review of sentencing discretion and statutory scheme)
- People v. Moore, 359 Ill. App. 3d 1090 (Ill. App. Ct. 2005) (limiting resentencing to original sentence barring new conduct)
- People v. Strawbridge, 404 Ill. App. 3d 460 (Ill. App. Ct. 2010) (resentencing cannot be worsened for mere attitude or lack of remorse)