Defendant was convicted of armed robbery with a firearm after jury trial. Prior to being allowed to represent himself, Defendant was admonished under Rule 401(a) but was incorrectly informed of potential maximum sentence of the charged offense. Despite court’s incorrect statement as to potential sentence, court substantially complied with Rule 401(a), and Defendant made a voluntary, knowing, and intelligent waiver of counsel prior to being allowed to proceed pro se. Defendant did not show that State prevented grand jury from returning a meaningful indictment by misleading or coercing it. Evidence was sufficient to prove that codefendant possessed a firearm, as defined in FOID Act, during the robbery. Court did not err by not admitting codefendant’s statement to detective, because Defendant did not seek its admission after codefendant invoked his 5th amendment right not to testify. (KARMEIER, FREEMAN, THOMAS, KILBRIDE, GARMAN, and BURKE, concurring.)
Illinois Supreme Court
Criminal Court
Right to Counsel