People v. Wilson, 2019 IL App (4th) 180214

Torre L. Wilson was convicted by a jury of aggravated domestic battery and resisting a peace officer; he was sentenced to 6 years and 30 days respectively.
After sentencing, Wilson filed a timely motion to reconsider (through counsel) and a pro se posttrial motion claiming ineffective assistance of trial counsel.
This court previously remanded for a preliminary Krankel inquiry (People v. Krankel and progeny) to determine whether new counsel should be appointed to investigate Wilson’s pro se ineffective-assistance claims.
On remand the trial court conducted a hearing in which it allowed Wilson to state complaints, allowed trial counsel to respond, and permitted a public defender (not trial counsel) to make brief argument; the court ruled on the merits that counsel was not ineffective and also addressed some sentencing-credit/assessments issues.
The appellate court held the trial court erred by ruling on the merits at the Krankel-style hearing and by failing to inquire into all factual bases of Wilson’s complaints; the court reversed and remanded with directions to appoint new counsel (if not already appointed) to investigate and act as appropriate.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether State’s closing improperly defined "great bodily harm" and invaded jury’s factfinding	The State contends appellate review may be barred or forfeited and did not participate on remand; jurisdictional issues exist	Wilson argues the State improperly defined great bodily harm in closing, depriving the jury of its role	Court declined to reach the merits (remand focused on Krankel issues); prior remand retained jurisdiction so the claim may be raised later
Whether the trial court complied with Krankel when addressing Wilson’s pro se ineffective-assistance claims	State concedes remand is appropriate but urges remand to same judge with directions to appoint new counsel if not already done	Wilson seeks remand to a different judge or an evidentiary hearing with newly appointed counsel, arguing possible neglect and incomplete inquiry	Court held the trial court committed reversible error by ruling on merits at the Krankel inquiry and failing to probe all complaints; reversed and remanded with directions to appoint new counsel (if not already) and allow investigation/action by appointed counsel
Whether Wilson’s $95 per diem credit was applied to assessed fines	State argues jurisdictional/forfeiture barriers may prevent appellate review now	Wilson asks that his per diem credit be applied to fines	Court did not decide; noted Wilson may raise the credit issue on remand and retained jurisdiction

People v. Krankel, 102 Ill. 2d 181 (1984) (trial court must inquire into pro se ineffective-assistance claims to determine if new counsel is needed)
People v. Johnson, 159 Ill. 2d 97 (1994) (describing scope of Krankel inquiry)
People v. Moore, 207 Ill. 2d 68 (2003) (permissible approaches for Krankel inquiry and when to appoint new counsel)
Eychaner v. Gross, 202 Ill. 2d 228 (2002) (alleged judicial bias requires more than erroneous rulings)
People v. Garrett, 139 Ill. 2d 189 (1990) (appellate court may remand for hearings while retaining jurisdiction)