People v. Vinson, 2017 IL App (3d) 150460

Defendant Rick Vinson was convicted after a bench trial of four counts of criminal sexual assault and sentenced to two consecutive 4-year terms (two counts merged). Private attorney Jason Kopec represented Vinson at trial and on direct appeal; the appellate court affirmed.
Vinson filed a pro se postconviction petition alleging multiple instances of ineffective assistance by trial and appellate counsel, including misleading advice about a plea offer and sentencing exposure.
The court appointed postconviction counsel, who filed a 68-page amended petition and a Rule 651(c) certificate, incorporating Vinson's allegations and attaching Vinson's notarized affidavit that counsel had said the prosecutor did not state years in the plea offer.
The State moved to dismiss; the circuit court dismissed most claims at the second stage but allowed two issues to proceed; after a third-stage hearing the petition was denied.
On appeal from the second-stage dismissal, Vinson argued his postconviction counsel was unreasonable for (1) failing to allege appellate counsel’s conflict of interest and (2) failing to attach affidavits (from the State or Kopec) documenting the plea terms or explaining their absence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether postconviction counsel unreasonably failed to allege appellate counsel conflict of interest	Postconviction counsel adequately presented claims; no conflict existed because Kopec did not have to argue his own ineffectiveness on appeal	Vinson: counsel should have alleged a conflict because Kopec represented him at trial and on appeal	Court: No reversible error — Lawton permits postconviction challenge where trial counsel also handled appeal, but a conflict exists only if counsel was required to argue his own ineffectiveness; Kopec did not do so, so no conflict to plead
Whether postconviction counsel unreasonably failed to attach affidavits showing plea terms or explain their absence	Counsel attached Vinson's notarized affidavit stating prosecutor did not state years; lack of State/Kopec affidavits may be strategic and not required	Vinson: counsel should have obtained/attached prosecutor or Kopec affidavits (or explained absence) to substantiate prejudice from plea advice	Court: Counsel’s inclusion of Vinson’s affidavit satisfied statutory/support requirements; absence of State/Kopec affidavits was not shown to be negligent or required — dismissal affirmed (Justice McDade dissented on this point)

People v. Lawton, 212 Ill. 2d 285 (2004) (an attorney who represents a defendant at trial and on appeal may create an inherent conflict if forced to argue his own ineffectiveness; postconviction proceedings can remedy such situations)
People v. Greer, 212 Ill. 2d 192 (2004) (Rule 651(c) and scope of postconviction counsel’s duties in amending pro se petitions)
People v. Collins, 202 Ill. 2d 59 (2002) (affidavits in postconviction petitions must enable objective corroboration)
People v. Delton, 227 Ill. 2d 247 (2008) (affidavits must identify sources, character, and availability of supporting evidence)
Lafler v. Cooper, 566 U.S. 156 (2012) (to show ineffective assistance in plea negotiations, defendant must show the outcome would have been different)
Cuyler v. Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335 (1980) (importance of counsel effectiveness and conflicts of interest doctrine)