Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

People v. Malone

Court of Appeals of Illinois, Third District

December 15, 2016

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
WILLIAM A. MALONE, Defendant-Appellant.

          Rule 23 order withdrawn January 23, 2017

          Opinion filed January 23, 2017

         Appeal from the Circuit Court of Peoria County, No. 09-CF-684; the Hon. David A. Brown, Judge, presiding.

          Michael J. Pelletier and John M. McCarthy, of State Appellate Defender's Office, of Springfield, for appellant.

          Jerry Brady, State's Attorney, of Peoria (Justin A. Nicolosi, of State's Attorneys Appellate Prosecutor's Office, of counsel), for the People.

          Panel PRESIDING JUSTICE HOLDRIDGE delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion. Justices O'Brien and Lytton concurred in the judgment and opinion.

          OPINION

          HOLDRIDGE, PRESIDING JUSTICE

         ¶ 1 The defendant, William A. Malone, appeals from the dismissal of his postconviction petition, arguing that postconviction counsel provided unreasonable assistance by failing to amend the postconviction petition or withdraw as counsel.

         ¶ 2 FACTS

         ¶ 3 The defendant was convicted of aggravated criminal sexual assault (720 ILCS 5/12-14(a)(1) (West 2008)), home invasion (720 ILCS 5/12-11(a)(2) (West 2008)), aggravated robbery (720 ILCS 5/18-5(a) (West 2008)), and failure to register as a sex offender (730 ILCS 150/10 (West 2008)). He was sentenced, respectively, to natural life imprisonment, 30 years' imprisonment, 30 years' imprisonment, and 10 years' imprisonment. The home invasion, aggravated robbery, and failure to register as a sex offender sentences would all run concurrent and would be consecutive to the sentence for aggravated criminal sexual assault. On appeal, this court affirmed his convictions, reduced his aggravated robbery sentence to 15 years, and vacated a DNA testing fee. People v. Malone, 2012 IL App (3d) 100425-U, ¶ 20.

         ¶ 4 The defendant subsequently filed a pro se postconviction petition, claiming that (1) his rights were violated when the State filed multiple counts charging the same crime under different theories, and home invasion was a lesser included offense of aggravated robbery; (2) one of the jurors worked at the same hospital as the victim and another knew the judge; (3) the prosecutor made improper comments to discredit the defendant and improperly vouched for the State's witnesses; and (4) he was not eligible for a natural life sentence because his prior sex convictions were for criminal sexual abuse.

         ¶ 5 The trial court appointed counsel to represent the defendant, and the State filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that none of the issues the defendant raised in his pro se petition had merit. Postconviction counsel did not amend the defendant's postconviction petition nor add any affidavits or any other supporting documentation. At the hearing on the State's motion to dismiss, the State chose to rest on the arguments contained in its motion to dismiss. Postconviction counsel stated that he disagreed with the argument set forth in the State's motion to dismiss, but would also stand on the arguments set forth in the pro se postconviction petition. The defendant made a statement at the hearing on the motion to dismiss, which expounded on his argument about the prosecutor's improper comments and potential bias of the jurors. The trial court gave the defendant the opportunity to submit further documentation of his claims should he so choose. It does not appear from the record that the defendant submitted any further documentation. The trial court took the matter under advisement and ultimately granted the State's motion to dismiss. Postconviction counsel filed a Rule 651(c) certificate. Ill. S.Ct. R. 651(c) (eff. Feb. 6, 2013).

         ¶ 6 ANALYSIS

         ¶ 7 On appeal, the defendant argues that postconviction counsel provided unreasonable assistance as counsel's representation amounted to representation "in name only." Specifically, the defendant argues that postconviction counsel should have either amended the postconviction ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.