People v. Profit

Court dismissed Defendant's successive postconviction petition, and Defendant alleged ineffective assistance of counsel in failure to amend his petition to allege additional claims. Defendant is required to show merit of excluded claims, as question of merit of claims is crucial to determine whether counsel acted unreasonably by not filing amended petition. Postconviction counsel filed Rule 651(c) certificate, triggering presumption of compliance with rule, and Defendant failed to rebut presumption; thus, no finding that counsel provided unreasonable level of assistance. (LAVIN and FITZGERALD SMITH, concurring.)