People v. Rainey

Defendant Vidal Rainey pleaded guilty to two counts of aggravated battery and later moved, pro se, to withdraw his plea, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. Appointed counsel amended the motion to incorporate defendant's pro se allegations but did not withdraw despite the conflict this created. The circuit court denied the motion without addressing the ineffective assistance claims, and defendant appealed.

The Fourth District affirmed. On the conflict-of-interest issue, the court held that although counsel generally must withdraw when facing a client's allegations of ineffectiveness in a motion to withdraw a plea, no actual conflict existed here because counsel had already investigated defendant's mental state defense—subpoenaing records, seeking a bona fide doubt evaluation, and obtaining a psychological evaluation—which did not support the defense. Because the underlying ineffective assistance claim lacked merit, counsel's failure to withdraw did not require remand. On the Krankel issue, the court found defendant's claim facially insufficient given the record showing counsel's investigation, and further held that defendant's voluntary guilty plea waived the claim, especially since he had raised and been rebuffed on the same issue at the plea hearing before choosing to plead guilty. Any error in failing to conduct a Krankel inquiry was deemed harmless.

Finally, despite the State's concession of a discrepancy between the court's fee waiver and the clerk's payment record, the court declined to remand for correction, directing that such ministerial corrections be sought first in the circuit court under Illinois Supreme Court Rule 472(c). This decision is useful for attorneys navigating conflict-of-interest and Krankel procedures following guilty pleas, and for addressing fines-and-fees record discrepancies through the proper procedural channel.