People v. Mares

2017 IL App (2d) 150565 No. 2-15-0565 Opinion filed January 26, 2018 ______________________________________________________________________________ IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS SECOND DISTRICT ______________________________________________________________________________ THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE ) Appeal from the Circuit Court OF ILLINOIS, ) of Boone County. ) Plaintiff-Appellee, ) ) v. ) No. 10-CF-76 ) JEREMY R. MARES, ) Honorable ) C. Robert Tobin III, Defendant-Appellant. ) Judge, Presiding. ______________________________________________________________________________ JUSTICE HUTCHINSON delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion. Justice McLaren specially concurred, with opinion. Justice Jorgensen dissented, with opinion. OPINION ¶1 Defendant, Jeremy R. Mares, appeals from an order of the circuit court of Boone County granting the State’s motion to dismiss his amended petition under the Post-Conviction Hearing Act (Act) (725 ILCS 5/122-1 et seq. (West 2014)) for relief from his conviction of armed violence (720 ILCS 5/33A-2(a) (West 2010)). Defendant argues that he is entitled to relief on the basis that the disposition of his direct appeal violated Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and People v. Jones, 38 Ill. 2d 384 (1967). We affirm. ¶2 Defendant was convicted following a bench trial. The armed-violence conviction was based on evidence that defendant committed the offense of aggravated battery while armed with 2017 IL App (2d) 150565 a “Category II weapon,” namely a box cutter. See 720 ILCS 5/33A-1(c)(2) (West 2010). Defendant was also found guilty of several counts of aggravated battery based on the same incident, but the trial court did not enter a judgment of conviction on those counts. The trial court sentenced defendant to a 10-year prison term for armed violence. Defendant appealed, and the Office of the State Appellate Defender was appointed to represent him. Appointed counsel did not file an appellate brief. Instead, counsel filed an “Unopposed Motion for Summary Disposition,” contending that the amount of court costs imposed by the trial court was excessive. The motion sought a refund of the overcharge. The motion stated that “counsel has read the complete record and has found no other issues to raise on appeal.” On July 12, 2013, we granted the motion and refunded defendant $162. People v. Mares, No. 2-12-0493 (July 12, 2013) (minute order). Six days later we vacated that order and increased the refund to $200. Mares, No. 2-12-0493 (July 18, 2013) (minute order). The order stated, “THIS ORDER IS FINAL AND SHALL STAND AS THE MANDATE OF THIS COURT.” On January 15, 2014, defendant filed a pro se petition under the Act. The trial court appointed counsel to represent defendant, and counsel amended the petition. The State successfully moved to dismiss the amended petition, and this appeal followed. ¶3 Defendant now argues that, by doing nothing more than moving for a summary disposition of his direct appeal, appellate counsel failed to act as an advocate for him. According to defendant, if there were no meritorious issues that could be raised on appeal, counsel should have moved to withdraw in accordance with the dictates of Anders and Jones. Otherwise, defendant argues, counsel was obligated to submit ...

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals