Defendant Awarded New Trial On Appeal

In the case of People v. Hayes, the defendant, Hayes, was found guilty of two counts of armed violence and unlawful possession of a weapon by a felon. The defendant was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 25 years on the armed violence counts. His other sentences were to be served concurrently. The defendant appealed his conviction, and the court saw fit to vacate the judgment and sentence against him. In this article, the Illinois criminal defense lawyers at Patel Law, PC will discuss the case and why the appeal was successful.

Background of the case 

The state prosecuted the defendant on two counts of armed violence which were subsequently compressed into one count via the one-act one-crime doctrine. According to prosecutors, a fight broke out at an Illinois bar. The state’s witnesses testified that the defendant had been drinking at the Bluford American Legion bar on the evening of the fight. The defendant began talking to a woman and the two discussed leaving the bar together. The wife of the victim interjected herself into the matter and refused to allow the woman to leave with the defendant because she was married. An argument broke out, and eventually, the arguing parties were asked to leave the bar by the bartender. The defendant exited the bar, went to his truck, and then got into a physical altercation with the victim. The defendant struck the victim in the neck with a knife or other sharp object, causing injury.

The issue at trial was whether or not the defendant struck the victim with his fist only or whether he used a knife or sharp object in the attack. Following the fight, the victim had a laceration to his neck that was indicative of being cut with something sharp. The injury was serious and required emergency treatment. The victim was transported to a local hospital. The victim testified that the defendant had a knife and cut his throat during the attack.

The defendant was ultimately convicted by the jury. On appeal, he raised several issues related to the case.

The appeal 

The defendant raised several issues on appeal. He was sexually involved with one of the attorneys who was representing him at the time of trial. He argued that this attorney operated under a conflict of interest while representing him because of their ongoing romantic and sexual relationship. As a result, he argued, the circuit court erred when it denied his motion for a new trial on these grounds.

The Sixth Amendment guarantees a criminal defendant the right to effective assistance of counsel. This includes conflict-of-interest-free representation. The guarantee of conflict-free representation provides a defendant “assistance by an attorney whose allegiance to his client is not diluted by conflicting interests of inconsistent obligations.” Illinois recognizes two types of conflicts: per se and actual conflict. In this case, the court found that an actual conflict existed and vacated the verdict.

Talk to a Criminal Defense Lawyer Today 

Patel Law, PC represents the interests of those charged with serious crimes in Decatur, IL. Call our Decatur criminal lawyers today to schedule an appointment, and we can begin preparing your defense right away.

Source:

ilcourtsaudio.blob.core.windows.net/antilles-resources/resources/220386f5-4552-437f-80d5-fa2a4a9b0747/People%20v.%20Hayes,%202024%20IL%20App%20(5th)%20210368.pdf