People v. Simpson
Key Takeaways
- 1 Postconviction counsel must obtain supporting affidavits or explain why they cannot be obtained under Rule 651(c) and section 122-2.
- 2 Failure to comply with Rule 651(c) procedural requirements mandates remand regardless of claim merit; trial court cannot presume dismissal was proper.
Summary
Kenneth D. Simpson appealed the dismissal of his second amended postconviction petition challenging his 2015 convictions for predatory criminal sexual assault of a child and aggravated criminal sexual abuse. Simpson's appointed postconviction counsel included a claim that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to call Simpson's stepson Aaron as a witness, but failed to obtain an affidavit from Aaron or provide an explanation for why such documentation could not be obtained. The trial court dismissed the petition, finding all claims failed to make a substantial showing of constitutional violation.
The Fifth District Court of Appeals held that postconviction counsel violated Illinois Supreme Court Rule 651(c) and section 122-2 of the Post-Conviction Hearing Act by including the Aaron claim without supporting documentation or explanation. Although counsel filed a Rule 651(c) certificate creating a presumption of reasonable assistance, Simpson rebutted this presumption by demonstrating substantial non-compliance. Under People v. Suarez, remand is required regardless of claim merit when counsel fails to fulfill Rule 651(c) duties. The court reversed in part and remanded for counsel to obtain affidavits or state why they could not be obtained.
The court affirmed dismissal of Simpson's remaining claims, finding he forfeited arguments regarding their merits by raising only the postconviction counsel assistance issue on appeal. This decision reinforces that postconviction counsel must substantially comply with procedural requirements to properly present claims to the trial court.
Key Holdings
1. Postconviction counsel must obtain affidavits or other supporting documentation for postconviction claims, or state in writing why such documentation cannot be obtained, to comply with Illinois Supreme Court Rule 651(c) and section 122-2 of the Post-Conviction Hearing Act.
2. A defendant can rebut the presumption of reasonable postconviction counsel assistance created by a Rule 651(c) certificate by demonstrating substantial non-compliance with the rule's requirements.
3. When postconviction counsel fails to substantially comply with Rule 651(c) duties, remand is required regardless of whether the underlying postconviction claims have merit; the trial court must determine whether claims require an evidentiary hearing based on a complete record.
4. Arguments not raised on appeal are forfeited; a defendant who raises only postconviction counsel assistance issues forfeits arguments regarding the merits of remaining postconviction claims.