(Court opinion corrected 8/11/16.) Defendant appealed his convictions of DUI and unlawful possession of cannabis, arguing he was deprived of effective assistance of counsel at trial. Defendant alleges that his counsel was ineffective for failing to: (1) cross examine officer who pulled him over about inconsistencies between his testimony and his dash-cam video; and (2) file a motion to suppress the cannabis found in his car. Counsel was not ineffective regarding the cross-examination. Given the mountain of circumstantial evidence to support the officers testimony, the outcome of the proceedings would not have changed even if counsel had cross-examined the officer regarding the contents of the video. Defendant’s DUI conviction is affirmed. Appellate court retained jurisdiction, and remanded the cause to the trial court for a hearing regarding the motion to suppress. Without a more developed record, the court could not determine whether this would have changed the outcome of the case. (HARRIS and POPE, concurring.)
Illinois Appellate Court
Criminal Court
Ineffective Assistance of Counsel