post-trial hearing in Illinois

1988The court remanded for a post-trial hearing on defendant’s motion in keeping with the guidelines established in People v. Jackson (1985), 131 Ill.

1988App. 3d 128 , 474 N.E.2d 466 (trial judge brought defendant’s letter complaining of the ineffective assistance of counsel to the attention of the attorneys immediately prior to the post-trial hearing).) Thus, defendant did not pursue the matter contained in his letter and, in these circumstances, waived any issue in this regard on appeal.

1992After finding that defendant had not established ineffective assistance of counsel under Strickland v. Washington (1984), 466 U.S. 668 , 80 L.

1987Ed. 2d 674 , 104 S. Ct. 2052 .) This court has held that failure to appoint new counsel for a post-trial hearing upon allegation of incompetence at trial does not always require substitution of counsel.

2005Cf. Childers v. State, 782 So.2d 513, 518 (2001) (no formal hearing on the use of physical restraints is necessary, but where there is a total lack of a record, the decision should be remanded for a hearing); See also, People v. Williams, 36 App.Div.2d 1018, 321 N.Y.S.2d 463 (1971)(where the facts relevant to the needs of restraint of defendant are not sufficiently developed at trial, a post-trial hearing should be held on that issue); People v. Reingold, 44 App.Div.2d 191, 353 N.Y.S.2d 978 (1974)(post-trial hearing must be had, wherein evidence should be presented for the record regarding rea

2005Cf. Childers v. State , 782 So.2d 513, 518 (2001)(no formal hearing on the use of physical restraints is necessary, but where there is a total lack of a record, the decision should be remanded for a hearing); See also, People v. Williams , 36 App. Div. 2d 1018, 321 NYS 2d 463 (1971)(where the facts relevant to the needs of restraint of defendant are not sufficiently developed at trial, a post-trial hearing should be held on that issue); People v. Reingold , 44 App. Div. 2d 191, 353 NYS2d 978 (1974)(post-trial hearing must be had, wherein evidence should be presented for the record regarding re

2001Specifically, the defendant claimed that "the trial court failed to examine the readily apparent ineffective assistance when defense counsel, at the post-trial hearing, revealed that he had additional witnesses who were not called at trial." Williams , 224 Ill.

2001Specifically, the defendant claimed that “the trial court failed to exam-inc the readily apparent ineffective assistance when defense counsel, at the post-trial hearing, revealed that he had additional witnesses who were not called at trial.” Williams, 224 Ill.

1992App. 3d 725, 730 , 581 N.E.2d 236, 240 .) The conflict may arise at a post-trial hearing as well.

1992App. 3d 725 , 581 N.E.2d 236 , this court recently held that, under the particular facts of that case, defendant’s filing of a disciplinary claim against defense counsel created a conflict of interest requiring appointment of new counsel for the post-trial hearing.

1992People v. Norris (1977), 46 Ill.

1981(People v. Smith (1967), 37 Ill. 2d 622 , 230 N.E.2d 169 .) In Smith, the alleged conflict occurred at a post-conviction hearing, but the conflict may arise at a post-trial hearing (People v. Norris (1977), 46 Ill.

1990App. 3d at 530 ) was not sufficient to meet the standard of specificity set forth in Brown v. Decatur Memorial Hospital (1980), 83 Ill. 2d 344, 349-50 .

1988Accordingly, we deem this issue waived on appeal. 107 Ill. 2d R. 366(bX2Xiii); Brown v. Decatur Memorial Hospital (1980), 83 Ill. 2d 344 , 415 N.E.2d 337 .

1985The facts before us are identical to those in People v. Smith (1967), 37 Ill. 2d 622 , 230 N.E.2d 169 , and, accordingly, we remand this cause for a new post-trial hearing on defendant’s allegation of ineffective assistance of trial counsel.

1985The facts before us are identical to those in People v. Smith (1967), 37 Ill. 2d 622 , 230 N.E.2d 169 , and, accordingly, we remand this cause for a new post-trial hearing on defendant’s allegation of ineffective assistance of trial counsel.

2025Id. at 369 . ¶ 105 Here, the County has repeatedly taken the position that it received a judgment following the hearing on August 4, 2021, a position that Judge Chapman and Judge Gibson ultimately agreed with.

2021People v. Roddis, 2020 IL 124352, ¶ 35 .

2010To read Pecoraro as distinguishing between appointed and retained counsel would create a conflict with Cuyler v. Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335 , 64 L.

2010To read Pecoraro as distinguishing between appointed and retained counsel would create a conflict with Cuyler v. Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335 , 64 L.

2003Defendant claims that even if the court was mistaken in finding defendant not guilty, the acquittal must stand where it is based on an error of fact or law, no matter how egregious, citing Poe , 121 Ill.

1996People v. Giles, 261 Ill.

1994The State cites to People v. Pendleton (1977), 52 Ill.

1994App. 3d 506 , 369 N.E.2d 356 , our court addressed the question of whether a defendant’s recantation in a post-trial hearing entitled her to a defense for perjury under section 32 — 2(c) of the Criminal Code.

1993App. 3d at 182 , 463 N.E.2d at 1072 .) However, at the post-trial hearing, the State’s Attorney admitted there was an understanding with the witness’ attorney that the State wanted the witness’ cooperation in the murder trial and that they were holding off on the theft trial in order to maintain leverage on the witness.

1992(See State v. Sinclair, 46 Wash. App. at 436 , 730 R2d at 744 (defendant offered only “a vague account of how counsel had lied” but otherwise “failed to articulate any reason” to the trial or appellate courts for replacing counsel).) We do not believe the trial court violated defendant’s sixth amendment right to conflict-free counsel by refusing defendant’s last-minute request to appoint counsel other than his private counsel (who may not even have been fired yet by defendant) to assist him at the post-trial hearing.

1992In People v. Perez (1992), 148 Ill. 2d 168 , in a death penalty post-conviction hearing, defense counsel was found ineffective when he failed to pursue or send a court-appointed investigator to pursue mitigating information and witnesses supplied by defendant.

1992In People v. Perez (1992), 148 Ill.2d 168 , 170 Ill.Dec. 304 , 592 N.E.2d 984 , in a death penalty post-conviction hearing, defense counsel was found ineffective when he failed to pursue or send a court-appointed investigator to pursue mitigating information and witnesses supplied by defendant.

1992App. 3d 507 , 552 N.E.2d 1078 , which review when the trial judge should appoint independent counsel to consider a defendant’s post-trial claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.

1991In People v. Bernasco (1990), 138 Ill. 2d 349 , 562 N.E.2d 958 , the supreme court held that a valid Miranda waiver must be knowing and intelligent in addition to being voluntary and free from coercion.

1991In People v. Bernasco (1990), 138 Ill. 2d 349 , 562 N.E.2d 958 , the supreme court held that a valid Miranda waiver must be knowing and intelligent in addition to being voluntary and free from coercion.