defendant may overcome presumption in Illinois

2025One way a defendant may overcome the presumption is to show that postconviction counsel “did not make all necessary amendments to the pro se petition,” such as “making amendments that are necessary to overcome procedural bars.” Addison, 2023 IL 127119, ¶ 21 . ¶ 52 The requirement in Rule 651(c) that postconviction counsel make necessary amendments does not mean that counsel is required to advance frivolous or patently nonmeritorious claims.

2025Quoting our supreme court, the majority states: “One way a defendant may overcome the presumption [of reasonable assistance] is to show that postconviction counsel 'did not make all necessary amendments to the pro se petition,’ such as ‘making amendments that are necessary to overcome procedural bars.’ ” Supra ¶ 51 (quoting People v. Addison, 2023 IL 127119, ¶ 21 ). ¶ 76 Second, the lack of an affidavit constitutes such a procedural bar.

2001The Fourth District found that these courts generally hold that "the defendant may overcome the privilege by making a strong showing that the disclosure of the location is material or necessary to his defense and that his need for the information outweighs the public's interest in keeping the location secret." Criss , 294 Ill.

2001The Fourth District found that these courts generally hold that “the defendant may overcome the privilege by making a strong showing that the disclosure of the location is material or necessary to his defense and that his need for the information outweighs the public’s interest in keeping the location secret.” Criss, 294 Ill.

2001App. 3d at 280-81 , citing Jennings , 428 Pa. Super. at 306-07 , 630 A.2d at 1262 ; Lugo , 406 Mass. at 570-72 , 548 N.E. 2d at 1265-67 ; Harley , 682 F. 2d at 1020 .

2001App. 3d at 280-81 , citing Jennings, 428 Pa. Super, at 306-07, 630 A.2d at 1262 ; Lugo, 406 Mass, at 570-72, 548 N.E.2d at 1265-67 ; Harley, 682 F. 2d at 1020 .

2001App. 3d at 280-81 , citing Jennings , 428 Pa. Super. at 306-07 , 630 A.2d at 1262 ; Lugo , 406 Mass. at 570-72 , 548 N.E. 2d at 1265-67 ; Harley , 682 F. 2d at 1020 .

2001App. 3d at 280-81 , citing Jennings , 428 Pa. Super. at 306-07 , 630 A.2d at 1262 ; Lugo , 406 Mass. at 570-72 , 548 N.E. 2d at 1265-67 ; Harley , 682 F. 2d at 1020 .

2001App. 3d at 280-81 , citing Jennings , 428 Pa. Super. at 306-07 , 630 A.2d at 1262 ; Lugo , 406 Mass. at 570-72 , 548 N.E. 2d at 1265-67 ; Harley , 682 F. 2d at 1020 .

2001App. 3d at 280-81 , citing Jennings , 428 Pa. Super. at 306-07 , 630 A.2d at 1262 ; Lugo , 406 Mass. at 570-72 , 548 N.E. 2d at 1265-67 ; Harley , 682 F. 2d at 1020 .

2024A defendant may overcome the presumption by showing counsel’s decision was “so irrational and unreasonable that no reasonable defense attorney, facing similar circumstances, would pursue such a strategy.” People v. Jones, 2012 IL App (2d) 110346, ¶ 82 ; see People v. Gardner, 2024 IL App (4th) 230443, ¶ 39 (pet. for leave to appeal pending, No. 131009 (filed Aug. 29, 2024)) (quoting People v. Watson, 2012 IL App (2d) 091328, ¶ 24 ); see also People v. Dupree, 2014 IL App (1st) 111872, ¶ 51 (finding counsel ineffective for engaging in trial strategy that opened the door to the admission -8- of

2024People v. Jones, 2012 IL App (2d) 110346, ¶ 82 .

2025The defendant may overcome the presumption by showing that counsel failed to “substantially comply with the strictures of the rule.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Id.

2023The defendant may overcome this presumption by showing that his attorney failed to “substantially comply with the duties mandated by Rule 651(c).” Profit, 2012 IL App (1st) 101307, ¶ 19 .

2022People v. Jones, 2011 IL App (1st) 092529 , ¶ 23, 955 N.E.2d 1200 .

2021Boucher, 2018 IL App (1st) 162233, ¶ 48 . ¶ 18 Westgate asserts that Kirsch forfeited her argument that Westgate acted in bad faith, as she failed to raise that argument at trial.

2021A defendant may overcome the presumption of sound trial strategy where counsel’s “decision appears so irrational and unreasonable that no reasonably effective defense attorney, facing similar circumstances, would pursue such a strategy.” Id.

1989App. 3d 799, 821 , 421 N.E.2d 1319 ), a defendant may overcome this presumption with proof by a preponderance of the evidence that he was insane when he committed the offense with which he has been charged.

1987(People v. Jones (1982), 109 Ill.

1982(People v. Moore (1980), 89 Ill.