People v. Smith

Summary

The Illinois Appellate Court, First District, affirmed the dismissal of Kenneth Smith’s second-stage postconviction petition as untimely and procedurally barred. The majority held that postconviction counsel’s Rule 651(c) certificates created a presumption of reasonable assistance and that no available facts were shown to excuse the filing delay. Justice Oden Johnson dissented, concluding that counsel’s failures, including not attaching a verification affidavit or Office of Professional Standards report and not amending the petition, warranted remand for a new second-stage hearing.

Holdings

1. Postconviction counsel must amend an untimely pro se petition to allege available facts showing that the delay was not due to the petitioner's culpable negligence, but counsel does not provide unreasonable assistance when the record contains no available facts that could excuse the delay.
2. The postconviction petition was untimely because it was due no later than February 28, 2014, but was not filed until September 19, 2019, and Smith did not allege facts establishing that the delay was not caused by his culpable negligence.
3. The additional alleged deficiencies did not warrant reversal because they did not cause the circuit court's dismissal and could not provide a basis for relief in light of the dispositive time bar.

Questions Presented

1. Whether postconviction counsel provided unreasonable assistance under Illinois Supreme Court Rule 651(c) by failing to amend Smith's untimely pro se petition to allege facts excusing the delay.
2. Whether alleged additional deficiencies by postconviction counsel warranted reversal despite the petition's untimeliness.
3. Whether the circuit court properly dismissed the postconviction petition as time-barred.

Disposition

affirmed