In 2017, Defendant, age 20 at time of offenses, filed 2nd successive postconviction petition, alleging (as he had in his 2010 petition) that his confession to 1991 murder was physically coerced by detectives. Defendant, after his 2010 petition was denied, found new evidence to corroborate his allegations of abuse, in affidavits from others attesting to similar abuse from the same 2 detectives. Defendant showed cause for his failure to present 3 affidavits, and the evidence of a 4th person who was exonerated upon filing a federal civil-rights complaint, in his prior petitions. These tell of a pattern of abuse very similar to Defendant's own, and meet the standard of documenting abuse similar enough to the abuse alleged to conclude that officers acted in conformity with pattern and practice of behavior. He did not possess and could not reasonably have been expected to obtain, evidence of the pattern and practice of abuse by these 2 detectives. Court erred in denying Defendant leave to file his 2nd successive postconviction petition. Leave to file Brady v. Maryland claim, that State failed to disclose evidence of a pattern-and-practice of abuse by these detectives, was properly denied, as Defendant cannot show prejudice, and knowledge of the alleged pattern of abuse cannot be imputed to the prosecutors. (McBRIDE and GORDON, concurring.)
Illinois Appellate Court
Criminal Court
Confessions