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). Trial counsel Jason Kopec represented him at trial and on direct appeal.
On direct appeal this court affirmed; several issues were found forfeited or waived and appellee counsel did not assert plain error.
Defendant filed a pro se postconviction petition alleging multiple instances of ineffective assistance by trial and appellate counsel, including failure to advise properly about a plea offer and sentencing exposure and that he had requested appointment of the public defender on appeal but Kopec continued to represent him.
The circuit court appointed postconviction counsel; counsel filed a 68‑page amended petition and a Rule 651(c) certificate, and attached a notarized affidavit from defendant describing the alleged plea discussion (no explicit term of years recalled).
The court dismissed most claims at the second stage, later holding at third stage that defendant did not prove he requested different appellate counsel and that trial counsel’s handling of DNA chain-of-custody could be trial strategy; defendant appeals only the reasonableness of postconviction counsel’s second-stage assistance.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (People)	Defendant's Argument (Vinson)	Held
Whether postconviction counsel unreasonably failed to amend to allege an appellate conflict of interest where trial counsel handled the appeal	Counsel was not required to allege a conflict absent an attorney being forced to argue his own ineffectiveness on direct appeal	Postconviction counsel should have pled ineffective assistance based on conflict because Kopec represented Vinson at trial and on appeal	Held: No unreasonable assistance — Lawton does not require a conflict claim simply because trial counsel handled the appeal; conflict exists only where counsel must argue his own ineffectiveness, which did not occur here
Whether postconviction counsel unreasonably failed to attach affidavits (State or Kopec) proving plea terms or explain their absence under 725 ILCS 5/122‑2	The amended petition included Vinson’s notarized affidavit denying a term of years was offered; absent proof of available supporting affidavits, counsel’s omission is not neglect and might be strategic	Counsel should have obtained or attached prosecutor/Kopec affidavits or explained their absence to avoid speculation on prejudice from plea advice	Held: No unreasonable assistance — defendant’s affidavit indicated no specific term was offered; counsel not required to attach State or Kopec affidavit and omission could reflect strategy; claim need not be expanded to novel bases (e.g., registry concerns)

People v. Lawton, 212 Ill. 2d 285 (Ill. 2004) (attorney who represents a defendant at trial and on direct appeal may create an inherent conflict if forced to argue his own ineffectiveness; postconviction relief is available to raise such claims in criminal context)
Cuyler v. Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335 (U.S. 1980) (importance of counsel effectiveness and conflict-of-interest principles)
Lafler v. Cooper, 566 U.S. 156 (U.S. 2012) (to show prejudice in plea-negotiation ineffective-assistance claim, defendant must show the outcome would have been different with competent advice)
People v. Palmer, 162 Ill. 2d 465 (Ill. 1994) (prejudice in plea-related claims cannot rest on mere conjecture)
People v. Allen, 2015 IL 113135 (Ill. 2015) (requirements for affidavits and supporting evidence in postconviction petitions)