arguable constitutional claim in Illinois

2023The first-stage threshold is low, requiring only that the petitioner “plead specific facts to assert an arguable constitutional claim.” (Emphasis added.) People v Brown, 236 Ill. 2d 175, 184 (2010).

2014People v. Brown, 236 Ill. 2d 175, 184 (2010).

2025“A petition which lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact is one which is based on an indisputably meritless legal theory or a fanciful factual allegation.” Id. at 16 . ¶ 18 On appeal, defendant argues counsel’s alleged promise of a shorter sentence being imposed presents an arguable constitutional claim of ineffective assistance.

2023Id. at 16 . ¶ 12 On appeal, Morgan abandons most of his claims, arguing solely that he made an arguable constitutional claim of ineffective assistance by alleging his trial counsel should have called the responding police officers to testify to the lack of physical evidence corroborating Ebelechukwu’s account. ¶ 13 To prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must show (1) counsel’s representation was objectively unreasonable, and (2) but for counsel’s deficient representation, a reasonable probability exists that the result of the trial would have been different.

2021See People v. Brown, 2017 IL App (1st) 150203, ¶ 31 . ¶ 61 IV.

2021See People v. Brown, 2017 IL App (1st) 150203, ¶ 31 . ¶ 61 IV.

2017People v. Delton, 227 Ill. 2d 247, 258 (2008). ¶ 17 In this appeal, defendant asserts he made an arguable constitutional claim of ineffective assistance of counsel based on counsel’s failure to investigate his negative chlamydia test results, and to present that evidence to the trial court in support of his contention that the victim’s positive chlamydia test results should have been admitted.

2017People v. Delton, 227 Ill. 2d 247, 258 (2008). ¶ 17 In this appeal, defendant asserts he made an arguable constitutional claim of ineffective assistance of counsel based on counsel’s failure to investigate his negative chlamydia test results, and to present that evidence to the trial court in support of his contention that the victim's positive chlamydia test results should have been admitted.

2020See id. ¶ 24; see also Upshaw, 2017 IL App (1st) 151405, ¶ 46 (where the defendant’s inculpatory statement was the only evidence against him, there was a reasonable probability that the result of the trial would have been different had trial counsel interviewed and presented an alibi witness). ¶ 38 Having concluded that the defendant has established an arguable constitutional claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel for failure to investigate and call Mr. Stewart and Mr. Bell, as witnesses at trial, we reverse the summary dismissal of his petition.

2020“The defendant must set forth only the gist of a constitutional claim, which means that the petition contains enough facts to make out an arguable constitutional claim.” Id. ¶ 32 The law-of-the-case doctrine prevents a party from “ ‘taking two bites out of the same appellate apple.’ ” See People v. Tenner, 206 Ill. 2d 381, 395 (2002) (quoting People v. Partee, 125 Ill. 2d 24, 37 (1988)).

2020“The defendant must set forth only the gist of a constitutional claim, which means that the petition contains enough facts to make out an arguable constitutional claim.” Id. ¶ 32 The law-of-the-case doctrine prevents a party from “ ‘taking two bites out of the same appellate apple.’ ” See People v. Tenner, 206 Ill. 2d 381, 395 (2002) (quoting People v. Partee, 125 Ill. 2d 24, 37 (1988)).

2020“Specifically, the law of the case doctrine bars relitigation of an issue already decided in the same case.” Id.