{
  "id": 2431833,
  "name": "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. KENNETH WAYNE FOSTER, Defendant-Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "People v. Foster",
  "decision_date": "1989-01-26",
  "docket_number": "No. 4-88-0310",
  "first_page": "1009",
  "last_page": "1011",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "178 Ill. App. 3d 1009"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "528 N.E.2d 1029",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "1030"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "174 Ill. App. 3d 454",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        3515231
      ],
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "456"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/174/0454-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "280 N.E.2d 710",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "year": 1988,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "712"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "51 Ill. 2d 68",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        5392579
      ],
      "year": 1988,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "70"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/51/0068-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "381 N.E.2d 264",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "270"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "72 Ill. 2d 358",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        5444241
      ],
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "370"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/72/0358-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "522 N.E.2d 1184",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "weight": 2,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "1188"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "122 Ill. 2d 367",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        5549914
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "376-77"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/122/0367-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 305,
    "char_count": 4307,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.756,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.2324645273709275e-07,
      "percentile": 0.6059843643393882
    },
    "sha256": "eec73664e816bc47b86ad97d75529108d4e3c63f61c87fa605a91c37394ad023",
    "simhash": "1:884219dc32f2951d",
    "word_count": 673
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:15:09.210343+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. KENNETH WAYNE FOSTER, Defendant-Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "JUSTICE LUND\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nOn August 11, 1987, defendant Kenneth Wayne Foster pleaded guilty to the charge of conspiracy to commit murder, in violation of section 8 \u2014 2 of the Criminal Code of 1961 (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1987, ch. 38, par. 8 \u2014 2), and was subsequently sentenced to a term of five years\u2019 imprisonment. On March 15, 1988, defendant filed a pro se petition for post-conviction relief. The circuit court of Macon County dismissed the petition as \u201cpatently without merit,\u201d pursuant to section 122 \u2014 2.1 of the Post-Conviction Hearing Act (Act) (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1987, ch. 38, par. 122 \u2014 2.1). Defendant appeals. We affirm.\nOn November 15, 1988, defendant filed a 10-page handwritten post-conviction petition. Although the petition was filed pro se, it was written in great detail with numerous cases and statutory references for support. Defendant asserted violations of several of his constitutional rights. His primary allegation was that he was denied his right to effective assistance of counsel. The trial court examined the petition and the pertinent trial records. In its order, it determined the petition was based on conclusions and did not provide any facts to support the allegations. In addition, the allegations were contradicted by defendant's statements at the guilty plea hearing. After a review of the petition and the record, the trial court concluded the petition was patently without merit and should be dismissed.\nOn appeal, defendant argues this court should substantially restrict the \u201cfrivolous or patently without merit\u201d standard used in the initial examination of a post-conviction petition, pursuant to section 122 \u2014 2.1 of the Act (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1987, ch. 38, par. 122 \u2014 2.1). Defendant\u2019s arguments stem from the supreme court\u2019s holding in People v. Free (1988), 122 Ill. 2d 367, 522 N.E.2d 1184. In Free, the court said a second post-conviction petition was properly dismissed where the defendant had already had \u201c \u2018one complete opportunity to show a substantial denial of his constitutional rights.\u2019 \u201d (Free, 122 Ill. 2d at 376-77, 522 N.E.2d at 1188, quoting People v. Logan (1978), 72 Ill. 2d 358, 370, 381 N.E.2d 264, 270.) Defendant argues that in light of the court\u2019s ruling in Free, trial courts should be required to more carefully scrutinize a pro se petitioner\u2019s petition for post-conviction relief to avoid a forfeiture of valid constitutional claims by legally unsophisticated petitioners. He argues he has made a colorable claim of ineffective assistance of counsel and, therefore, the court should have appointed counsel to investigate the claim and to ensure defendant had an adequate opportunity to be heard in court.\nDefendant\u2019s concern that the supreme court has substantially limited the ability of a pro se petitioner to present a valid claim of constitutional deprivation is unfounded. The court in Free indicated only that a petitioner did not have a \u201cright\u201d to a second post-conviction petition. This is not an \u201cironclad bar\u201d to multiple post-conviction petitions, however, and subsequent petitions may be filed where \u201c \u2018fundamental fairness\u2019 requires a court to allow a second petition. People v. Hollins (1972), 51 Ill. 2d 68, 70, 280 N.E.2d 710, 712.\u201d People v. Carlisle (1988), 174 Ill. App. 3d 454, 456, 528 N.E.2d 1029, 1030.\nIn the instant case, defendant\u2019s allegations were clearly communicated. The trial court could fairly examine the merits of the petition, in light of the record of the proceedings. It correctly determined the petition lacked the necessary merit for further consideration. We will not restrict the statutory prerogative of the trial courts to examine and summarily reject those petitions that are \u201cpatently without merit.\u201d\nFor the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the circuit court of Macon County is affirmed.\nAffirmed.\nKNECHT and SPITZ, JJ., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "JUSTICE LUND"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Daniel D. Yuhas, of State Appellate Defender\u2019s Office, of Springfield, for appellant.",
      "Larry R. Fichter, State\u2019s Attorney, of Decatur (Kenneth R. Boyle, Robert J. Biderman, and J.A.C. Knuppel, all of State's Attorneys Appellate Prosecutor\u2019s Office, of counsel), for the People."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. KENNETH WAYNE FOSTER, Defendant-Appellant.\nFourth District\nNo. 4-88-0310\nOpinion filed January 26, 1989.\nDaniel D. Yuhas, of State Appellate Defender\u2019s Office, of Springfield, for appellant.\nLarry R. Fichter, State\u2019s Attorney, of Decatur (Kenneth R. Boyle, Robert J. Biderman, and J.A.C. Knuppel, all of State's Attorneys Appellate Prosecutor\u2019s Office, of counsel), for the People."
  },
  "file_name": "1009-01",
  "first_page_order": 1031,
  "last_page_order": 1033
}