Defendant was convicted, after jury trial, of 2 counts of predatory criminal sexual assault and 1 count of aggravated criminal sexual assault of his 10-year-old daughter. Trial court's decision to deny attorney's oral request, under Rule 13(c)(6), for a limited scope appearance at hearing on Defendant's pro se section 116-3 motion seeking DNA testing was proper, because attorney made no attempt to comply with Rule 13(c)(6). Because there was confusion on nature of a section 116-3 action in circuit court and attorney's intentions about scope of his representation are in dispute, remand for further proceedings and clarification is warranted. In exercise of Court's supervisory authority, circuit court's ruling denying Defendant's pro se motion seeking DNA testing is vacated. (KARMEIER, THOMAS, GARMAN, BURKE, THEIS, and NEVILLE, concurring.)
Illinois Supreme Court
Criminal Court
DNA Evidence