People v. Hattery

In People v. Hattery, 109 Ill. 2d 449, 461, 488 N.E.2d 513, 94 Ill. Dec. 514 (1985), the defendant pleaded not guilty to a murder charge, but, during opening statements, one of his trial attorneys told the jury that "the defense was not asking the jury to find the defendant not guilty" but rather was asking the jury to find him ineligible for the death penalty. Hattery, 109 Ill. 2d at 458-59. During the guilt-innocence phase of the trial, the defense presented evidence that could mitigate the defendant's sentence, but it presented no evidence to defend against the charge of murder. Hattery, 109 Ill. 2d at 459. The supreme court held that the defendant's attorneys' representation was ineffective under the rule from Cronic, because the attorneys pursued a strategy--conceding guilt and arguing against the imposition of the death penalty--that was "totally at odds with the defendant's earlier plea of not guilty." Hattery, 109 Ill. 2d at 464. The supreme court held that "counsel may not concede his client's guilt in the hope of obtaining a more lenient sentence where a plea of not guilty has been entered, unless the record adequately shows that the defendant knowingly and intelligently consented to his counsel's strategy." Hattery, 109 Ill. 2d at 465.