Defendant appealed from his conviction of first-degree murder and argued on appeal that he did not make a knowing and intelligent waiver of his trial counsel’s per se conflict of interest, that the State did not prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, that the trial court abused its discretion in admitting gang evidence, and that the trial court committed manifest error in denying his post-trial motion raising a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel where trial court failed to call witnesses to impeach prosecution witnesses. The appellate court affirmed, finding that defendant’s waiver of his counsel’s per se conflict was knowing and intelligent where he understood the conflict and its consequences and was adamant that counsel continue to represent him, that there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction, and that the trial court did not err in the admission of evidence or in the denial of the post-trial motion. (LYLE and NAVARRO, concurring)
Illinois Appellate Court
Criminal Court
Waiver of Conflict