Defendant filed a pro se post-conviction petition alleging that his natural life sentence was unconstitutional and his petition was dismissed after post-conviction counsel did not file a response and instead stood on the allegations contained in the pro se petition. Defendant argued on appeal that he rebutted the presumption that post-conviction counsel provided reasonable assistance by showing that counsel stood on a meritless petition rather than moving to withdraw or amending the petition. The supreme court affirmed, finding that defendant failed to rebut the presumption of reasonable assistance where there was no showing that post-conviction counsel knew that petitioner’s claim was frivolous or patently without merit. (THEIS, NEVILLE, OVERSTREET, HOLDER WHITE, CUNNINGHAM, and ROCHFORD, concurring)
Illinois Supreme Court
Criminal Court
Post-Conviction Hearing Act