nonmeritorious claim in Illinois

2025“Thus, the inquiry as to prejudice requires that the reviewing court examine the merits of the underlying issue [citation] for a defendant does not suffer prejudice from appellate counsel’s failure to raise a nonmeritorious claim on appeal.” Id. at 362 . ¶ 47 Turning to the merits, a defendant has a right to a speedy trial under the United States and Illinois Constitutions (U.S. Const., amends.

2022To this end, in order to determine whether appellate counsel was ineffective, we must examine the merits of the underlying issue because the “defendant does not suffer prejudice from appellate counsel’s failure to raise a nonmeritorious claim on appeal.” Id. ¶ 52 As an added wrinkle, when the trial court responded to the jury’s various notes, defendant’s attorney did not object.

2025See Greer, 212 Ill. 2d at 205 .

2025Id. at 205 . ¶ 120 A defendant asserting a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel must show that “(1) the attorney’s performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness and (2) the attorney’s performance prejudiced the defendant in that, absent counsel’s deficient performance, there is a reasonable probability that the result of the proceeding would have been different.” People v. Jackson, 2020 IL 124112, ¶ 90 (citing Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984)). ¶ 121 In the present case, defendant’s claim of unreasonable assistance fails because his underlying claim of

2025“We, therefore, must determine whether [defendant’s] underlying *** claim[s] would have been successful if raised on direct appeal.” People v. Childress, 191 Ill. 2d 168, 175 (2000). ¶ 40 A. Ineffective Assistance of Trial Counsel—Failure to Use Peremptory Challenge ¶ 41 Defendant argues that trial counsel was ineffective in failing to use a peremptory challenge against the potential juror at issue because the potential juror “was equivocal about his - 17 - 1-24-0712 ability to be fair and impartial” and as a result defendant “did not have an impartial jury.” Defendant relies on the fact the p

2024See People v. Childress, 191 Ill. 2d 168, 175 (2000) (appellate counsel cannot be deemed ineffective for failing to raise a nonmeritorious claim of trial counsel’s ineffectiveness). ¶ 43 Second, we consider whether posttrial counsel was ineffective for failing to argue in posttrial proceedings that the trial court erred in overruling trial counsel’s objection to the State’s question about whether Zavala yelled, “Stop, Sanchez,” to defendant outside the home.

2025Thus, the inquiry as to prejudice requires that the reviewing court examine the merits of the underlying issue (People v. Mack, 167 Ill. 2d 525, 534 (1995)); a defendant does not suffer prejudice from appellate counsel’s failure to raise a nonmeritorious claim on appeal.

2000Thus, the inquiry as to prejudice requires that the reviewing court examine the merits of the underlying issue (Mack, 167 Ill. 2d at 534 ), for a defendant does not suffer prejudice from appellate counsel’s failure to raise a nonmeritorious claim on appeal (Easley, 192 Ill. 2d at 329 ; West, 187 Ill. 2d at 435 ; Guest, 166 Ill. 2d at 390 ).

2021“Thus, the inquiry as to prejudice requires the court to examine the merits of the underlying issue, for a defendant does not suffer prejudice from appellate counsel’s failure to raise a nonmeritorious claim on appeal.” Borizov, 2019 IL App (2d) 170004, ¶ 14 .

2020People v. Borizov, 2019 IL App (2d) 170004, ¶ 14 (no prejudice accrues from a nonmeritorious claim on direct appeal).

2025Id. at 205 . ¶ 120 A defendant asserting a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel must show that “(1) the attorney’s performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness and (2) the attorney’s performance prejudiced the defendant in that, absent counsel’s deficient performance, there is a reasonable probability that the result of the proceeding would have been different.” People v. Jackson, 2020 IL 124112, ¶ 90 (citing Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984)). ¶ 121 In the present case, defendant’s claim of unreasonable assistance fails because his underlying claim of

2025Because challenging the accountability instruction on appeal would not have been 20 successful, there is no basis for finding appellate counsel ineffective. 12 See Collins, 2021 IL App (1st) 170597, ¶ 71 (“a defendant does not suffer prejudice from appellate counsel’s failure to raise a nonmeritorious claim on appeal”); People v. Caballero, 126 Ill. 2d 248, 270 (1989).

2025Id. at 205 . ¶ 120 A defendant asserting a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel must show that “(1) the attorney’s performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness and (2) the attorney’s performance prejudiced the defendant in that, absent counsel’s deficient performance, there is a reasonable probability that the result of the proceeding would have been different.” People v. Jackson, 2020 IL 124112, ¶ 90 (citing Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984)). ¶ 121 In the present case, defendant’s claim of unreasonable assistance fails because his underlying claim of

2025Because challenging the accountability instruction on appeal would not have been 20 successful, there is no basis for finding appellate counsel ineffective. 12 See Collins, 2021 IL App (1st) 170597, ¶ 71 (“a defendant does not suffer prejudice from appellate counsel’s failure to raise a nonmeritorious claim on appeal”); People v. Caballero, 126 Ill. 2d 248, 270 (1989).

2022People v. Rogers, 197 Ill. 2d 216, 223 (2001). ¶ 111 C.

2021See Harris, 206 Ill. 2d at 311 (materiality under Brady identical to prejudice under Strickland); People v. Carballido, 2015 IL App (2d) 140760, ¶ 66 (same).

2021See Harris, 206 Ill. 2d at 311 (materiality under Brady identical to prejudice under Strickland); People v. Carballido, 2015 IL App (2d) 140760, ¶ 66 (same).

2021Accordingly, 30 the circuit court properly dismissed this claimed error at the second stage of the postconviction proceeding. ¶ 83 Intermingled with his argument concerning the photographs are undeveloped arguments that suggest that the defendant was denied his right to a speedy trial and that the State committed a violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 87 (1963), by failing to turn over notes of the investigating officer who recorded the interviews of the victims.

2021See, e.g., People v. Harrigan, 2021 IL App (3d) 180579-U , ¶ 26 (finding that “postconviction counsel did not violate Rule 651(c) in failing to raise an ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claim, because that claim lacked merit”); see also People v. Rials, 345 Ill. App. 3d 636, 642 (2003) (noting that postconviction counsel is “ ‘only required to investigate and properly present the petitioner’s claims. *** Counsel’s responsibility is to adequately present those claims which the petitioner raises’ ” (Emphasis in original.)). ¶ 57 Defendant essentially argues that original postconvictio

2016Greer, 212 Ill. 2d at 205 ; People v. Johnson, 17 Ill.