People v. Carroll

Defendant was found guilty of first-degree murder and that he personally discharged a firearm. Post-trial counsel, who also represented defendant on direct appeal, filed a post-trial petition alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel. The trial court dismissed the petition at the second stage by finding that the claims could have been raised on direct appeal. Defendant retained new counsel and appealed, arguing that the trial court erred in failing to advance his petition to third-stage proceedings, that post-conviction counsel had a conflict of interest because he did not allege his own ineffective assistance as appellate counsel for failing to raise the issues on direct appeal, and that post-conviction counsel failed to properly present defendant’s claims. The appellate court affirmed, finding that the forfeited post-conviction claims would not have had merit if they had been raised on direct appeal and that defendant did not make a substantial showing that post-conviction counsel labored under an actual conflict of interest. (LANNERD and KNECHT, concurring)