People v. Agee

This case present question as to whether appointed post-conviction counsel failed to fulfill his duty of reasonable assistance under Post-Conviction Hearing Act by neglecting to plead essential element of claim that counsel added in amending defendant’s pro se post-conviction petition. Appellate Court, in affirming trial court’s dismissal of defendant’s post-conviction petition, found that requirement of reasonable post-conviction representation extends only to defendant’s original claims brought prior to appointment or retention of counsel. As such, defendant had no legal basis to object to appointed counsel’s treatment of claim not originally raised by defendant. Appellate Court further rejected defendant’s claim that Rule 651(c) required some level of representation by appointed counsel in presentation of new claims. (Summary Order entered December 23, 2021.)