ineffective assistance claim in Illinois

2026We held that despite the PSI and additional records attached thereto, the record was insufficient, as “written documentation in a PSI showing defendant’s mental impairments does not eliminate the need for sworn testimony and factual findings specifically addressing the basis of the as-applied challenge.” Id. ¶ 40 (citing People v. Landerman, 2018 IL App (3d) 150684 , ¶ 56.). ¶ 75 In addressing the ineffective assistance claim, we reiterated the familiar test under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984), and found that the defendant’s argument was premature because the court could not ev

2026People v. Cherry, 2016 IL 118728 , - 21 - ¶ 30 (citing Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 694 (1984)). “[T]o prevail on an ineffective assistance claim under Strickland, a defendant must establish both prongs of the Strickland test.” Cherry, 2016 IL 118728, ¶ 31 . ¶ 70 To establish that a defendant was prejudiced by counsel’s deficiencies, “[t]he defendant must show that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.” Strickland, 466 U.S. at 694 .

2026People v. Patterson, 2014 IL - 12 - No. 1-23-0431-B 115102, ¶ 81. “[I]f an ineffective-assistance claim can be disposed of because the defendant suffered no prejudice, we need not determine whether counsel’s performance was deficient.” People v. Graham, 206 Ill. 2d 465, 476 (2003). ¶ 50 Garduza argued that his trial counsel was ineffective by (i) failing to request a jury instruction regarding the officers’ failure to activate their body-worn cameras, (ii) stipulating that Carreon had seen Garduza with a firearm, and (iii) “encouraging” the jury to find Garduza was a gang member.

2026People v. Patterson, 2014 IL 115102 , ¶ 81. “[I]f an ineffective-assistance claim can be disposed of because the defendant suffered no prejudice, we need not determine whether counsel’s performance was deficient.” People v. Graham, 206 Ill. 2d 465, 476 (2003). ¶ 48 Our supreme court has held that “on a claim of ineffective assistance for failing to properly preserve issues for review, defendant’s rights are protected by Supreme Court Rule 615(a), which allows a court to review unpreserved claims of plain error that could reasonably have affected the verdict.” People v. Coleman, 158 Ill. 2d 319

2025The court further noted “this court has ‘repeatedly noted that a default may not preclude an ineffective-assistance claim for what trial counsel allegedly ought to have done in presenting a defense.’ ” Id. (quoting People v. West, 187 Ill. 2d 418, 427 (1999)).

2023In particular, an ineffective assistance claim that is “ ‘based on what ought to have been done may depend on proof of matters which could not have been included in the record precisely because of the allegedly deficient representation.’ ” Tate, 2012 IL 112214, ¶ 14 (quoting People v. Erickson, 161 Ill. 2d 82, 88 (1994)).

2026People v. Johnson, 2021 IL 126291, ¶ 53 . “[I]f it is easier to dispose of an ineffective-assistance claim on the ground that it lacks a showing of sufficient prejudice, a court may proceed directly to Strickland’s prejudice prong and need not determine whether counsel’s performance was deficient.” Id. (citing People v. Givens, 237 Ill. 2d 311, 331 , (2010)).

2026In other words, “failure to establish prejudice is a sufficient basis to deny a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.” Drew, 2024 IL App (5th) 240697, ¶ 34 . “[I]f it is easier to dispose of an ineffective- assistance claim on the ground that it lacks a showing of sufficient prejudice, a court may proceed directly to [the] prejudice prong and need not determine whether counsel’s performance was deficient.” People v. Johnson, 2021 IL 126291, ¶ 53 (citing People v. Givens, 237 Ill. 2d 311, 331 (2010)). 24 ¶ 71 Here, defendant is unable to demonstrate that he was prejudiced by defense couns

2026In other words, “failure to establish prejudice is a sufficient basis to deny a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.” People v. Drew, 2024 IL App (5th) 240697, ¶ 34 . “[I]f it is easier to dispose of an ineffective-assistance claim on the ground that it lacks a showing of sufficient prejudice, a court may proceed directly to [the] prejudice prong and need not determine 14 whether counsel’s performance was deficient.” People v. Johnson, 2021 IL 126291, ¶ 53 (citing People v. Givens, 237 Ill. 2d 311, 331 (2010)). ¶ 47 To establish prejudice under Strickland, “a defendant must establish ‘t

2025People v. Domagala, 2013 IL 113688, ¶ 36 (citing People v. Albanese, 104 Ill. 2d 504 (1984) (adopting Strickland)). ¶ 28 To prevail on an ineffective assistance claim, the “defendant must demonstrate that counsel’s performance was deficient and that the deficient performance prejudiced the defendant.” (Emphasis added.) Id. (citing Strickland, 466 U.S. at 687 ).

2025See People v. Griffin, 178 Ill. 2d 65, 74 (1997) (if an ineffective assistance claim fails because the defendant failed to establish prejudice, we need not consider whether counsel’s performance was objectively unreasonable). ¶ 37 Defendant claims that the State has forfeited these theories of probable cause because, “[f]or the first time on appeal, the State now contends that [defendant] was arrested for violating the Illinois Vehicle Code and Chicago Municipal Code.” The State did not raise these theories of probable cause in the trial court because defendant did not challenge the legality o

2023See People v. Griffin, 178 Ill. 2d 65, 74 (1997) (“[I]f the ineffective-assistance claim can be disposed of on the ground that the defendant did not suffer prejudice, a court need not decide whether counsel’s performance was constitutionally 6 deficient.”).

2026People v. Johnson, 2021 IL 126291, ¶ 53 . “[I]f it is easier to dispose of an ineffective-assistance claim on the ground that it lacks a showing of sufficient prejudice, a court may proceed directly to Strickland’s prejudice prong and need not determine whether counsel’s performance was deficient.” Id. (citing People v. Givens, 237 Ill. 2d 311, 331 , (2010)).

2026In other words, “failure to establish prejudice is a sufficient basis to deny a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.” Drew, 2024 IL App (5th) 240697, ¶ 34 . “[I]f it is easier to dispose of an ineffective- assistance claim on the ground that it lacks a showing of sufficient prejudice, a court may proceed directly to [the] prejudice prong and need not determine whether counsel’s performance was deficient.” People v. Johnson, 2021 IL 126291, ¶ 53 (citing People v. Givens, 237 Ill. 2d 311, 331 (2010)). 24 ¶ 71 Here, defendant is unable to demonstrate that he was prejudiced by defense couns

2026However, “a default may not preclude an ineffective-assistance claim for what trial counsel allegedly ought to have done in presenting a defense.” People v. West, 187 Ill. 2d 418, 427 (1999) (holding that defendant’s postconviction claim that counsel rendered ineffective assistance by not calling a forensic expert was not forfeited because the claim did not concern something that counsel actually did that was apparent on the face of the record).

2026Thus, “ ‘a default may not preclude an ineffective-assistance claim for what trial counsel allegedly ought to have done in presenting a defense.’ ” Id. (quoting People v. West, 187 Ill. 2d 418, 427 (1999)). ¶ 60 In this case, all of Carroll’s claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel relied on facts that were not part of the record on direct appeal and thus required substantiation by affidavits or other evidence.

2026“Counsel’s failure to assert a speedy-trial violation cannot establish either prong of an ineffective assistance claim if there is no lawful basis for raising a speedy-trial objection.” People v. Phipps, 238 Ill. 2d 54, 65 (2010).

2026See Phipps, 238 Ill. 2d at 65 (“Counsel’s failure to assert a speedy-trial violation cannot establish 18 No. 1-23-1754 either prong of an ineffective assistance claim if there is no lawful basis for raising a speedy-trial objection.”).

2024“The failure to satisfy either prong of the Strickland test precludes a finding of ineffective assistance of counsel.” People v. Patterson, 217 Ill. 2d 407, 438 (2005). ¶ 166 When assessing an ineffective assistance claim, the defendant “must overcome the strong presumption that the challenged action or inaction of counsel was the product of sound trial strategy and not of incompetence.” People v. Coleman, 183 Ill. 2d 366, 397 (1998). “[T]rial counsel’s decision whether to present a particular witness is within the realm of strategic choices that are generally not subject to attack on the grou

2023“To prevail on an ineffective-assistance claim, a defendant must show that: (1) counsel’s performance was deficient, and (2) the deficient performance prejudiced the defendant such that he was deprived of a fair trial.” People v. Patterson, 217 Ill. 2d 407, 438 (2005). “[A] defendant must overcome the strong presumption that the challenged action or inaction of counsel was the product of sound trial strategy and not of incompetence.” People v. Coleman, 183 Ill. 2d 366, 397 (1998).

2023When evaluating the ineffective- assistance claim, “some interchange” between the court and counsel is “permissible and usually 42 necessary.” People v. Moore, 207 Ill. 2d 68, 78 (2003).

2022Id. at 78-79 . ¶ 10 A threshold question is whether the defendant advanced an ineffective assistance claim that is adequate to trigger the trial court’s duty to conduct a Krankel inquiry.

2024“The failure to satisfy either prong of the Strickland test precludes a finding of ineffective assistance of counsel.” People v. Patterson, 217 Ill. 2d 407, 438 (2005). ¶ 166 When assessing an ineffective assistance claim, the defendant “must overcome the strong presumption that the challenged action or inaction of counsel was the product of sound trial strategy and not of incompetence.” People v. Coleman, 183 Ill. 2d 366, 397 (1998). “[T]rial counsel’s decision whether to present a particular witness is within the realm of strategic choices that are generally not subject to attack on the grou

2023“To prevail on an ineffective-assistance claim, a defendant must show that: (1) counsel’s performance was deficient, and (2) the deficient performance prejudiced the defendant such that he was deprived of a fair trial.” People v. Patterson, 217 Ill. 2d 407, 438 (2005). “[A] defendant must overcome the strong presumption that the challenged action or inaction of counsel was the product of sound trial strategy and not of incompetence.” People v. Coleman, 183 Ill. 2d 366, 397 (1998).

2026People v. Hensley, 2014 IL App (1st) 120802, ¶ 47 (“[T]he failure of a defendant to show that error occurred at all defeats both an ineffective assistance claim and a claim of error under either prong of the plain error doctrine.”). ¶ 69 III.

2026Thus, “the failure of a defendant to show that error occurred at all defeats both an ineffective assistance claim and a claim of error under either prong of the plain error doctrine.” Hensley, 2014 IL App (1st) 120802, ¶ 47 .

2022However, the complete failure to impeach the sole eyewitness when significant impeachment is available is not trial strategy and, thus, may support an ineffective assistance claim. [Citation.]” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) People v. Layton, 2021 IL App (1st) 172418, ¶ 86 (quoting People v. Salgado, 263 Ill.

2021“However, the complete failure to impeach the sole eyewitness when significant impeachment is available is not trial strategy and, thus, may support an ineffective assistance claim.” People v. Salgado, 263 Ill.

2023Although a defendant must satisfy both prongs of the Strickland test (People v. Jackson, 2020 IL 124112, ¶ 90 ), we may resolve an ineffective assistance claim based on either prong (People v. Pulliam, 206 Ill. 2d 218, 249 (2002)). ¶ 33 In the context of postplea proceedings, Rule 604(d) establishes the duties of counsel in assisting a defendant with a motion to withdraw a plea and in protecting the defendant’s due process rights.

2022To satisfy the prejudice prong, the defendant must show “actual - 19 - No. 1-19-1510 prejudice, not simply speculation that defendant may have been prejudiced.” People v. Patterson, 2014 IL 115102, ¶ 81 . “[A] ‘reasonable probability’ is defined as a showing sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome, rendering the result unreliable or fundamentally unfair.” Id. ¶ 63 While a defendant must satisfy both prongs of the Strickland test (People v. Jackson, 2020 IL 124112, ¶ 90 ), we may resolve an ineffective assistance claim based on the prejudice prong without considering whether counsel’s

2026Evans, 186 Ill. 2d at 94 (“[I]f the ineffective-assistance claim can be disposed of on the ground that the defendant did not suffer prejudice, a court need not decide whether counsel’s performance was constitutionally deficient.”).

2025“However, if the ineffective-assistance claim can be disposed of on the ground that the defendant did not suffer prejudice, a court need not decide whether counsel’s performance was constitutionally deficient.” Evans, 186 Ill. 2d at 94 . ¶ 32 As discussed, this claim was without merit.

2003"If an ineffective-assistance claim can be disposed of on the ground that defendant did not suffer sufficient prejudice, the court need not decide whether counsel's errors were serious enough to constitute less than reasonably effective assistance under the deficiency prong." People v. Pacheco, 281 Ill.App.3d 179, 183 , 216 Ill.Dec. 920 , 666 N.E.2d 370 (1996), citing People v. Eddmonds, 143 Ill.2d 501, 512 , 161 Ill.Dec. 306 , 578 N.E.2d 952 (1991).

2003"If an ineffective-assistance claim can be disposed of on the ground that defendant did not suffer sufficient prejudice, the court need not decide whether counsel's errors were serious enough to constitute less than reasonably effective assistance under the deficiency prong." People v. Pacheco, 281 Ill.App.3d 179, 183 , 216 Ill.Dec. 920 , 666 N.E.2d 370 (1996), citing People v. Eddmonds, 143 Ill.2d 501, 512 , 161 Ill.Dec. 306 , 578 N.E.2d 952 (1991).

2022Id. at 11-12 . ¶ 24 Based on the aforementioned jurisprudence, the question before this court is whether the ineffective assistance claim in defendant’s petition had an arguable basis in law.

2022Id. at 9 . ¶ 11 “To prevail on an ineffective-assistance claim, a defendant must show that: (1) counsel’s performance was deficient, and (2) the deficient performance prejudiced the defendant such that he was deprived of a fair trial.” People v. Patterson, 217 Ill. 2d 407, 438 (2005).

2024“We review de novo whether counsel’s omission supports an ineffective assistance claim.” Id. ¶ 64 The defendant argues that although trial counsel asserted the affirmative defense of compulsion to the charge of possession of a stolen motor vehicle, he was, nevertheless, ineffective for failing to assert the affirmative defense of necessity to the charges of burglary and possession of a stolen motor vehicle resulting in convictions for conduct that was permitted by law.

2023“We review de novo whether counsel’s omission supports an ineffective assistance claim.” Id. ¶ 51 D.

2021In doing so, the Court reasoned that ‘[w]hen an ineffective-assistance claim is brought on direct appeal, appellate counsel and the court must proceed on a trial record not developed precisely for the object of litigating or preserving the claim and thus often -9- incomplete or inadequate for this purpose.’ ” Id. at 134 (quoting Massaro v. United States, 538 U.S. 500, 504-05 (2003)).

2021In doing so, the Court reasoned that ‘[w]hen an ineffective-assistance claim is brought on direct appeal, appellate counsel and the court must proceed on a trial record not developed precisely for the object of litigating or preserving the claim and thus often -9- incomplete or inadequate for this purpose.’ ” Id. at 134 (quoting Massaro v. United States, 538 U.S. 500, 504-05 (2003)).

2025People v. Veach, 2017 IL 120649 , ¶ 30. ¶ 41 In reviewing an ineffective-assistance claim, this court reviews counsel’s actions under the totality of the circumstances of the individual case.

2025Accordingly, as defendant’s petition did not make a - 17 - 2025 IL App (2d) 240566-U substantial showing that trial counsel rendered deficient performance by not investigating or presenting evidence from Johnson, the postconviction court did not err in dismissing this ineffective-assistance claim. ¶ 44 Second, although we need not address prejudice, as we have determined trial counsel’s performance was not deficient (Veach, 2017 IL 120649, ¶ 30 (both prongs must be satisfied)), we reject defendant’s contention that the petition made a substantial showing of prejudice from trial counsel’s failu

2020Id. ¶ 25 Subsequent court interpretation of the Krankel procedure has resulted in a body of law that requires more focus in the initial review of a defendant’s ineffective assistance claim with the result being that the defendant is not automatically entitled to the appointment of new counsel.

2020The State also argues that the circuit court did not err, when defendant did not voice a complaint with his attorney’s performance, but rather stated his attorney did a “good job” and only voiced a grievance that he was unable to pay his attorney the agreed-upon amount to conduct a jury trial. ¶ 110 In People v. Krankel, 102 Ill. 2d 181, 189 (1984), the Illinois Supreme Court held that where a defendant brought a posttrial motion alleging ineffective assistance of his trial counsel, the defendant should be represented by newly appointed counsel in a hearing to determine the merits of the ineff

2026See, e.g., Jackson, 2020 IL 124112, ¶ 90 (stating an ineffective-assistance claim fails unless the defendant can show, “absent counsel’s deficient performance, there is a reasonable probability that the result of the proceeding - 13 - would have been different”). ¶ 59 III.

2025See Jackson, 2020 IL 124112, ¶ 91 (explaining a defendant could not show “prejudice” for purposes of an ineffective-assistance claim where the court had already determined the subject comments did not constitute prosecutorial misconduct under a plain-error analysis).

2021See People v. Hale, 2013 IL 113140, ¶ 17 (courts may dispose of an ineffective-assistance claim by proceeding directly to the prejudice prong without addressing counsel’s performance).

2021See People v. Hale, 2013 IL 113140, ¶ 17 (courts may dispose of an ineffective-assistance claim by proceeding directly to the prejudice prong without addressing counsel’s performance).

2025“Matters of trial strategy are generally immune from claims of ineffective assistance of [trial] counsel.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) People v. Manning, 241 Ill. 2d 319, 327 (2011). ¶ 40 Ineffective assistance of defense counsel “requires a bifurcated standard of review, wherein a reviewing court must defer to the trial court’s findings of fact unless they are against the manifest weight of the evidence but must make a de novo assessment of the ultimate legal issue of whether trial counsel’s omission supports an ineffective assistance claim.” People v. Berrier, 362 Ill.

2015People v. Berrier, 362 Ill.