failure to raise claim in Illinois

2026Edwards, 2012 IL 111711, ¶ 22-23 ; People v. Smith, 2014 IL 115946, ¶ 30 . ¶ 26 Under the cause-and-prejudice test, a defendant must establish both (1) cause for the failure to raise the claim in an earlier proceeding and (2) prejudice resulting from that failure.

2022The bar against successive postconviction proceedings should not be relaxed unless (1) a defendant can establish “cause and prejudice” for the failure to raise the claim earlier or (2) he can show actual innocence under the “fundamental miscarriage of justice” exception. 7 No. 1-20-1112 Edwards, 2012 IL 111711, ¶¶ 22-23 ; People v. Smith, 2014 IL 115946, ¶ 30 . ¶ 20 Under the cause and prejudice test, a defendant must establish both (1) cause for his or her failure to raise the claim earlier and (2) prejudice stemming from his or her failure to do so.

2023“To obtain leave of court, a defendant must demonstrate ‘cause’ for the failure to raise the claim in the initial petition and that ‘prejudice’ resulted from that failure.” Id. -6- “The Act provides that ‘cause’ is shown by a defendant identifying an objective factor that impeded the ability to raise a specific claim during the initial postconviction proceeding; ‘prejudice’ is shown by demonstrating that the claim not raised during the initial proceeding so infected the trial that the resulting conviction or sentence violated due process.” Id. (citing 725 ILCS 5/122-1(f) (West 2014)). ¶ 19 A d

2023“To obtain leave of court, a defendant must demonstrate ‘cause’ for the failure to raise the claim in the initial petition and that ‘prejudice’ resulted from that failure.” Id. -6- “The Act provides that ‘cause’ is shown by a defendant identifying an objective factor that impeded the ability to raise a specific claim during the initial postconviction proceeding; ‘prejudice’ is shown by demonstrating that the claim not raised during the initial proceeding so infected the trial that the resulting conviction or sentence violated due process.” Id. (citing 725 ILCS 5/122-1(f) (West 2014)). ¶ 19 A d

2024Lusby, 2020 IL 124046 , ¶ 27.

2021To obtain leave of court to file a successive petition, “a defendant must demonstrate cause for the failure to raise the claim in the initial petition and prejudice from that failure. [Citation.] Section 122-1(f) of the Act explains that a defendant shows ‘cause by identifying an objective factor that impeded his or her ability to raise a specific claim during his or her initial post- conviction proceedings’ and ‘prejudice by demonstrating that the claim not raised during his or her initial post-conviction proceedings so infected the trial that the resulting conviction or sentence violated due

2023“The first basis for relaxing the bar is when a petitioner can establish ‘cause and prejudice’ for the failure to raise the claim earlier.” Id.

2023“The first basis for relaxing the bar is when a petitioner can establish ‘cause and prejudice’ for the failure to raise the claim earlier.” Id.

2023“To obtain leave of court, a defendant must demonstrate ‘cause’ for the failure to raise the claim in the initial petition and that ‘prejudice’ resulted from that failure.” Id. -6- “The Act provides that ‘cause’ is shown by a defendant identifying an objective factor that impeded the ability to raise a specific claim during the initial postconviction proceeding; ‘prejudice’ is shown by demonstrating that the claim not raised during the initial proceeding so infected the trial that the resulting conviction or sentence violated due process.” Id. (citing 725 ILCS 5/122-1(f) (West 2014)). ¶ 19 A d

2023“To obtain leave of court, a defendant must demonstrate ‘cause’ for the failure to raise the claim in the initial petition and that ‘prejudice’ resulted from that failure.” Id. -6- “The Act provides that ‘cause’ is shown by a defendant identifying an objective factor that impeded the ability to raise a specific claim during the initial postconviction proceeding; ‘prejudice’ is shown by demonstrating that the claim not raised during the initial proceeding so infected the trial that the resulting conviction or sentence violated due process.” Id. (citing 725 ILCS 5/122-1(f) (West 2014)). ¶ 19 A d

2023Edwards, 2012 IL 111711, ¶¶ 22-23 ; People v. Brown, 2017 IL App (1st) 150132, ¶ 36 .

2018Edwards , 2012 IL 111711 , ¶¶ 22-23, 360 Ill.Dec. 784 , 969 N.E.2d 829 ; People v. Brown , 2017 IL App (1st) 150132 , ¶ 36, 418 Ill.Dec. 446 , 90 N.E.3d 604 .

1999See People v. Orange, 168 Ill. 2d 138, 149 , 659 N.E.2d 935 (1995); People v. Thompkins, 161 Ill. 2d 148, 157-58 , 641 N.E.2d 371 (1994).

1999See People v. Orange, 168 Ill. 2d 138, 149 , 659 N.E.2d 935 (1995); People v. Thompkins, 161 Ill. 2d 148, 157-58 , 641 N.E.2d 371 (1994).

2025Edwards, 2012 IL 111711, ¶¶ 22-23 . 7 ¶ 26 The filing of a successive postconviction petition is “highly disfavored” (People v. Simms, 2018 IL 122378, ¶ 38 ) and allowed only in “very limited circumstances” (People v. Davis, 2014 IL 115595, ¶ 14 ).

2024Edwards, 2012 IL 111711, ¶¶ 22-23 . ¶ 24 The filing of a successive postconviction petition is “highly disfavored” (People v. Simms, 2018 IL 122378, ¶ 38 ) and allowed only in “very limited circumstances” (People v. Davis, 2014 IL 115595, ¶ 14 ).

2025A defendant must obtain leave from the circuit court to file a successive petition under the Act. 725 ILCS 5/122-1(f) (West 2022). ¶ 16 To obtain leave, a defendant must do one of the following: (1) show cause and prejudice for the failure to raise a claim in his earlier petition or (2) show a “ ‘fundamental miscarriage of justice’ ***, [which] requires a [defendant] to make a persuasive showing of ‘actual innocence.’ ” People v. Prante, 2023 IL 127241, ¶ 59 (quoting People v. Taliani, 2021 IL 125891, ¶ 55 ).

2023A defendant must obtain leave from the circuit court to file a successive petition under the Act. 725 ILCS 5/122-1(f) (West 2022). ¶ 26 To obtain leave, a defendant must do one of the following: (1) show cause and prejudice for the failure to raise a claim in his earlier petition or (2) show a “ ‘fundamental miscarriage of justice’ *** [which] requires a [defendant] to make a persuasive showing of ‘actual innocence.’ ” People v. Prante, 2023 IL 127241, ¶ 59 (quoting People v. Taliani, 2021 IL 125891, ¶ 55 , 174 N.E.3d 503 ).

2023And, although the failure to raise a claim on direct appeal can result in forfeiture of that claim, a defendant is not precluded “from raising an issue on collateral review that depend[s] upon facts not found in the record.” Veach, 2017 IL 120649, ¶ 47 .

2023And although the failure to raise a claim on direct appeal can result in forfeiture of that claim, a defendant is not precluded “from raising an issue on collateral review that depend[s] upon facts not found in the record.” Veach, 2017 IL 120649, ¶ 47 .

2021Id.

2020Id.

2021“Cause” is an objective factor that impeded the defendant’s ability to raise the claim earlier (People v. Guerrero, 2012 IL 112020, ¶ 17 ), while “prejudice” occurs when the alleged constitutional error so infected the entire trial that the resulting conviction or sentence violates due process (People v. Ortiz, 235 Ill. 2d 319, 329 (2009)). ¶ 15 To establish cause, the defendant points to his mental illness, arguing that it left him unable to raise this claim earlier.

2021“Cause” is an objective factor that impeded the defendant’s ability to raise the claim earlier (People v. Guerrero, 2012 IL 112020, ¶ 17 ), while “prejudice” occurs when the alleged constitutional error so infected the entire trial that the resulting conviction or sentence violates due process (People v. Ortiz, 235 Ill. 2d 319, 329 (2009)). ¶ 15 To establish cause, the defendant points to his mental illness, arguing that it left him unable to raise this claim earlier.

2017In his initial brief, defendant asserted, citing People v. Cotto, 2016 IL 119006, ¶ 32 , 51 N.E.3d 802 , the supreme court “recently reiterated that private counsel must render reasonable assistance at the first stage -9­ of post[ ]conviction proceedings.” The State’s brief did address defendant’s position and, in fact, presents argument under the presumption a prisoner is entitled to reasonable assistance at the first stage of postconviction proceedings. ¶ 34 Following the briefing in this case but before oral arguments, defendant’s counsel, much to his credit, brought recent adverse authorit

2017In his initial brief, defendant asserted, citing People v. Cotto, 2016 IL 119006, ¶ 32 , 51 N.E.3d 802 , the supreme court “recently reiterated that private counsel must render reasonable assistance at the first stage -9­ of post[ ]conviction proceedings.” The State’s brief did address defendant’s position and, in fact, presents argument under the presumption a prisoner is entitled to reasonable assistance at the first stage of postconviction proceedings. ¶ 34 Following the briefing in this case but before oral arguments, defendant’s counsel, much to his credit, brought recent adverse authorit

2017In his initial brief, defendant asserted, citing People v. Cotto, 2016 IL 119006, ¶ 32 , 51 N.E.3d 802 , the supreme court “recently reiterated that private counsel must render reasonable assistance at the first stage of post[ ]conviction proceedings.” The State’s brief did address defendant’s position and, in fact, presents argument under the presumption a prisoner is entitled to reasonable assistance at the first stage of postconviction proceedings. ¶ 34 Following the briefing in this case but before oral arguments, defendant’s counsel, much to his credit, brought recent adverse authority, P

2017In his initial brief, defendant asserted, citing People v. Cotto, 2016 IL 119006, ¶ 32 , 51 N.E.3d 802 , the supreme court “recently reiterated that private counsel must render reasonable assistance at the first stage -9­ of post[ ]conviction proceedings.” The State’s brief did address defendant’s position and, in fact, presents argument under the presumption a prisoner is entitled to reasonable assistance at the first stage of postconviction proceedings. ¶ 34 Following the briefing in this case but before oral arguments, defendant’s counsel, much to his credit, brought recent adverse authorit

2017In particular, a defendant seeking leave to file a successive postconviction petition must demonstrate cause for failing to raise the claim in his initial postconviction petition. 725 ILCS 5/122-1(f) (West 2012); People v. Simon, 2014 IL App (1st) 130567 , ¶ 65. ¶ 26 Our supreme court has also recognized a second category of successive postconviction petitions that warrants relaxation of the procedural bar: those raising a fundamental miscarriage of justice.

2016In particular, a defendant seeking leave to file a successive postconviction petition must demonstrate cause for failing to raise the claim in his initial postconviction petition. 725 ILCS 5/122-1(f) (West 2012); People v. Simon, 2014 IL App (1st) 130567 , ¶ 65. - 10 ­ 1-14-1021 ¶ 26 Our supreme court has also recognized a second category of successive postconviction petitions that warrants relaxation of the procedural bar: those raising a fundamental miscarriage of justice.

2014Id. at __, 132 S. Ct. at 1317-20 .

2014Id. at __, 132 S. Ct. at 1317-20 .

2008English, 381 Ill.

2008English, 381 Ill.

2006Smith, 341 Ill.App.3d at 536 , 276 Ill.Dec. 472 , 794 N.E.2d at 374 .

2006Smith, 341 Ill.App.3d at 536 , 276 Ill.Dec. 472 , 794 N.E.2d at 374 .

2002The amended post-conviction petition advanced five claims for relief: (1) trial counsel was ineffective in failing to properly investigate and present mitigating evidence at the capital sentencing hearing; (2) defendant was denied equal protection or, in the alternative, effective assistance of appellate counsel, regarding a failure to raise a challenge pursuant to Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 , 90 L.

2002The amended post-conviction petition advanced five claims for relief: (1) trial counsel was ineffective in failing to properly investigate and present mitigating evidence at the capital sentencing hearing; (2) defendant was denied equal protection or, in the alternative, effective assistance of appellate counsel, regarding a failure to raise a challenge pursuant to Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 , 90 L.