{
  "id": 4293672,
  "name": "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MICHAEL A. TRUSSEL, Defendant-Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "People v. Trussel",
  "decision_date": "2010-02-08",
  "docket_number": "No. 4\u201410\u20140023",
  "first_page": "913",
  "last_page": "915",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "397 Ill. App. 3d 913"
    }
  ],
  "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 375",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "year": 1988,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "377"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "174 Ill. App. 3d 234",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        3514909
      ],
      "year": 1988,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "237-38"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/174/0234-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "713 N.E.2d 662",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "year": 1999,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "665",
          "parenthetical": "Second District, citing Barnes"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "305 Ill. App. 3d 326",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        1208096
      ],
      "year": 1999,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "331",
          "parenthetical": "Second District, citing Barnes"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/305/0326-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "684 N.E.2d 416",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "year": 1997,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "420",
          "parenthetical": "Third District, holding a defendant's handwritten letter addressed to the trial judge triggered the trial court's affirmative duty to appoint counsel to assist the defendant \"in the preparation and presentation of a motion pursuant to Rule 604(d)\""
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "291 Ill. App. 3d 545",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        456133
      ],
      "year": 1997,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "550",
          "parenthetical": "Third District, holding a defendant's handwritten letter addressed to the trial judge triggered the trial court's affirmative duty to appoint counsel to assist the defendant \"in the preparation and presentation of a motion pursuant to Rule 604(d)\""
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/291/0545-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 349,
    "char_count": 5135,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.744,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.1444447147304727
    },
    "sha256": "9fd56a4e7bc1d3bcb4a7f017cc0963a6ae0ba857b11ef051fe99d5cb70275b72",
    "simhash": "1:ae369de86369b8c7",
    "word_count": 853
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:15:46.302641+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. MICHAEL A. TRUSSEL, Defendant-Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "JUSTICE McCULLOUGH\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nThis appeal comes to us on the motion of defendant\u2019s counsel, the office of the State Appellate Defender (OSAD), for summary remand with directions to strike the notice of appeal, treat the pro se motion filed by defendant as a pro se postplea motion, and appoint counsel to represent defendant on the motion.\nOur facts here are taken from OSAD\u2019s motion and its appendix. On December 8, 2009, defendant, Michael A. Trussel, while assisted by counsel, pleaded guilty to the charged offense of battery, a Class A misdemeanor (720 ILCS 5/12\u20143(a), (b) (West 2008)) and the trial court sentenced him to 1 year\u2019s probation with a condition of 30 days in jail to be served as work release. The docket entry states defendant was admonished on his appeal rights.\nOn December 30, 2009, the Vermilion County circuit court clerk\u2019s staff filed defendant\u2019s timely pro se letter to the court as a notice of appeal. Defendant\u2019s letter stated the following:\n\u201cI Michael Trussel wish I [sic] apeal [sic] my case[.] I feel I did not git [sic] a fair trial[.] My lawyer did not git [sic] the video from Walmart[.] He told me a [sic] did not have a chanc [sic] and scared me into taking the plea. I am not guilty. They should have the video[.] I feel that the video is key in my defenc [sic].\u201d\nThe circuit clerk treated this document as a notice of appeal and filed the notice of appeal in this case.\nOSAD has filed a motion for summary remand, contending the circuit court clerk ought not have filed the instant notice of appeal. The State has elected not to file a response.\nRule 604(d) provides in pertinent part as follows:\n\u201cNo appeal from a judgment entered upon a plea of guilty shall be taken unless the defendant, within 30 days of the date on which sentence is imposed, files in the trial court a motion to reconsider the sentence, if only the sentence is being challenged, or, if the plea is being challenged, a motion to withdraw the plea of guilty and vacate the judgment. *** The trial court shall then determine whether the defendant is represented by counsel, and if the defendant is indigent and desires counsel, the trial court shall appoint counsel. If the defendant is indigent, the trial court shall order a copy of the transcript as provided in Rule 402(e) be furnished the defendant without cost.\u201d (Emphasis added.) 210 Ill. 2d R. 604(d).\nOSAD maintains that defendant, acting pro se, filed what amounts to a postplea pleading indicating his desire to appeal, alleging that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel. OSAD asserts that the pro se document suggests defendant needed counsel and Rule 604(d) provides that he was entitled to counsel for the purpose of filing a proper postplea motion and perfecting the appeal. OSAD contends defendant did not request that a notice of appeal be filed, although defendant requested \u201can appeal.\u201d Rather, this document contained the rudiments of an ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim.\nUnder these circumstances, OSAD suggests that defendant\u2019s pro se request was not amenable of resolution through a ministerial act by the circuit court clerk. The document should have been forwarded to a judge, who could then have appointed counsel for the purpose of assisting defendant in perfecting his right to direct appeal. People v. Barnes, 291 Ill. App. 3d 545, 550, 684 N.E.2d 416, 420 (1997) (Third District, holding a defendant\u2019s handwritten letter addressed to the trial judge triggered the trial court\u2019s affirmative duty to appoint counsel to assist the defendant \u201cin the preparation and presentation of a motion pursuant to Rule 604(d)\u201d). OSAD further contends even if the handwritten letter does not suffice to constitute a postplea motion, a trial judge is required to investigate whether a defendant desires counsel to assist in preparation of a postplea motion whenever a defendant \u201cmanifests an interest in appealing.\u201d People v. Griffin, 305 Ill. App. 3d 326, 331, 713 N.E.2d 662, 665 (1999) (Second District, citing Barnes).\nIn People v. Ledbetter, 174 Ill. App. 3d 234, 237-38, 528 N.E.2d 375, 377 (1988), this court stated \u201cbecause of the strict waiver requirements of Rule 604(d), fundamental fairness requires that a defendant be afforded a full opportunity to explain his allegations and that he have assistance of counsel in preparing the motion.\u201d So it is in the instant case. We agree with OSAD.\nAccordingly, we grant OSAD\u2019s motion and remand the cause with directions to strike the notice of appeal, appoint counsel to represent defendant, and proceed in accordance with Rule 604(d).\nRemanded with directions.\nSTEIGMANN and POPE, JJ., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "JUSTICE McCULLOUGH"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Michael J. Pelletier, Gary R. Peterson, and Karen Munoz, all of State Appellate Defender\u2019s Office, of Springfield, for appellant.",
      "Randall Brinegar, State\u2019s Attorney, of Danville (Patrick Delfino and Robert J. Biderman, both of State\u2019s Attorneys Appellate Prosecutor\u2019s Office, of counsel), for the People."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MICHAEL A. TRUSSEL, Defendant-Appellant.\nFourth District\nNo. 4\u201410\u20140023\nOpinion filed February 8, 2010.\nMichael J. Pelletier, Gary R. Peterson, and Karen Munoz, all of State Appellate Defender\u2019s Office, of Springfield, for appellant.\nRandall Brinegar, State\u2019s Attorney, of Danville (Patrick Delfino and Robert J. Biderman, both of State\u2019s Attorneys Appellate Prosecutor\u2019s Office, of counsel), for the People."
  },
  "file_name": "0913-01",
  "first_page_order": 929,
  "last_page_order": 931
}