People v. White
24 N.E.3d 158
Ill. App. Ct.2015Background
- Kenyatta White was convicted at a 2006 bench trial for the 2003 murder of Aramein Brown based primarily on eyewitness identifications (Martina Brewer, Sherry Collier, Shawn Davis) and photo/lineup identifications. The conviction was affirmed on direct appeal and by the Illinois Supreme Court.
- In 2012 White filed an initial postconviction petition alleging actual innocence and ineffective assistance, attaching among other materials an affidavit from David Jennings claiming he saw the shooter and that it was not White, and that he had been coerced by victim’s brother Ajani to implicate White.
- Jennings’s affidavit states he was present at the scene, saw a shooter who was smaller and younger than White, and that Ajani threatened him to say White was the shooter; Jennings claimed prior reluctance to speak and only recently executed the affidavit.
- The trial court dismissed the petition at the first (screening) stage as frivolous and patently without merit. White appealed the dismissal.
- The appellate court considered whether, under the low-threshold first-stage standard for initial postconviction petitions, Jennings’s affidavit constitutes newly discovered, material, noncumulative evidence likely to change the result on retrial and thus whether the petition should advance to the second stage.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (White) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Jennings’s affidavit is newly discovered evidence | Defense knew of Jennings and attempted contact; not newly discovered | Jennings would not have cooperated earlier because of threats; thus evidence could not have been obtained sooner with diligence | Affidavit is arguably newly discovered — taking Jennings’s statements as true, diligence could not have compelled earlier cooperation |
| Whether Jennings’s affidavit is material and noncumulative | Jennings’s account is undermined by prior statements identifying White | Affidavit adds independent, probative eyewitness account contradicting identification of White | Affidavit is arguably material and noncumulative — it adds new descriptive evidence that could raise reasonable doubt |
| Whether the affidavit is so conclusive it would probably change the result on retrial | Affidavit is impeachable by Jennings’s earlier contrary statements and inconsistent with trial evidence | At first-stage screening, court must accept well-pled facts as true and not weigh credibility; affidavit could be exonerating enough to change outcome | Under the low first-stage standard, the affidavit is arguably conclusive enough to survive screening and proceed to second stage |
| Procedural disposition | N/A | Petition should advance to full postconviction review | Trial court’s dismissal reversed; cause remanded for second-stage proceedings on the entire petition |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. White, 395 Ill. App. 3d 797 (discussing direct-appeal record and lineup issue)
- People v. Cunningham, 267 Ill. App. 3d 1009 (discussing admissibility and trustworthiness of extrajudicial confessions)
- People v. Molstad, 101 Ill. 2d 128 (new evidence may produce new questions for trier of fact)
- People v. Hodges, 234 Ill. 2d 1 (standards for actual-innocence claims at postconviction)
- People v. Anderson, 402 Ill. App. 3d 1017 (definition of newly discovered evidence and diligence)
- People v. Williams, 392 Ill. App. 3d 359 (affidavit from previously unheard participant can be newly discovered evidence)