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. Todd

Court of Appeals of Illinois, Third District

September 9, 2019

The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
James R. TODD, Defendant-Appellant.

Page 677

          Appeal from the Circuit Court of the 14th Judicial Circuit, Whiteside County, Illinois. Circuit No. 07-CF-188, Honorable Trish A. Joyce, Judge, Presiding.

         James E. Chadd, Peter A. Carusona, Nathaniel A. Nieman, of State Appellate Defender’s Office, of Ottawa, for appellant.

         Terry A. Costello, State’s Attorney, of Morrison (Patrick Delfino and Thomas D. Arado, of State’s Attorneys Appellate Prosecutor’s Office, of counsel), for the People.

          OPINION

         SCHMIDT, PRESIDING JUSTICE 

         [435 Ill.Dec. 605][¶ 1] Defendant, James R. Todd, appeals from the Whiteside County circuit court’s

Page 678

[435 Ill.Dec. 606] summary dismissal of his pro se postconviction petition. Defendant argues that the court erred in dismissing his petition because it presented an arguable claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. We affirm.

         [¶ 2] I. BACKGROUND

         [¶ 3] On February 25, 2008, defendant entered an open guilty plea to one count of unlawful delivery of a controlled substance (720 ILCS 570/401(a)(2)(A) (West 2006)). The factual basis for the plea reported that an undercover officer purchased an ounce of cocaine from defendant for $1000. The court accepted defendant’s guilty plea and released defendant on bond.

         [¶ 4] Before the sentencing hearing, the State prepared a presentence investigation report (PSI). The criminal history section of the PSI stated that defendant had five prior felony convictions.

         [¶ 5] On May 27, 2010, defendant appeared with counsel for the sentencing hearing. Before the court pronounced defendant’s sentence, the court found, in aggravation, that (1) defendant had a significant history of criminal activity and (2) a prison sentence was necessary to deter others from committing the same crime. The court further said:

"The other factor that I simply can’t ignore is the, is the, frankly the significant amount of cocaine that was sold here, and I’m not going to ignore it. That, that tells me that this is something more than just a casual, a casual deal, and especially in light of the history, and you can ...

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.