Defendant was convicted, after jury trial, of armed robbery and aggravated battery. Considering testimony of State's witness and corroborating evidence, a rational trier of fact could have determined that Defendant committed the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Defendant failed to sufficiently establish that trial results would have been different had defense counsel tendered accomplice-witness instruction. Given that jury did receive IPI instructions on prior inconsistent statements and general witness credibility, and that in their opening and closing statements and that parties repeatedly encouraged jury to question credibility of State's witness, Defendant was not prejudiced by his counsel's failure to tender accomplice-witness testimony. (HUTCHINSON and BIRKETT, concurring.)
Illinois Appellate Court
Criminal Court
Ineffective Assistance of Counsel