People v. Shamlodhiya

Defendant was convicted, after jury trial, of first-degree murder and residential arson. Defendant's lack of awareness of content of counsel's closing argument is not a constitutional violation cognizable under Post-Conviction Hearing Act. Defense counsel's argument did not amount to functional withdrawal of involuntary-manslaughter instruction; though counsel was not actively arguing for involuntary manslaughter, he was placing the option before the jury in the manner in which, in his professional judgment, the jury would be most receptive to it, while still keeping option for acquittal open. (BURKE and McLAREN, concurring.)