Supreme Court of Illinois Finds Defendants Who Pleaded Guilty Can Bring Freestanding Claims of Actual Innocence

Illinois and a number of other states allow for a convicted defendant to bring a freestanding claim of actual innocence. The issue that has divided the states is whether such a claim can only be made by defendants convicted after trials or whether such a claim can also be made by a defendant after a guilty (or nolo contendere) plea. I wrote an article on the split among courts, and its title makes my position clear: Why States Must Consider Innocence Claims After Guilty Pleas. As far as I can tell, Illinois is the first state to consider the issue since that article, and…the news is good.

In People v. Reed, the defendant entered into a plea agreement pursuant to which he pleaded guilty to one count of armed violence in exchange for a sentence of 15 years’ imprisonment. Thereafter, the defendant sought to bring a freestanding actual innocence clam pursuant to the Illinois Post-Conviction Hearing Act. In rejecting the State’s claim that defendants who plead guilty cannot bring freestanding claims of actual innocence, the Supreme Court of Illinois held that

Plea agreements, while vital to our criminal justice system…, are not structured to “weed out the innocent” or guarantee the factual validity of the conviction…That is what plea bargaining is.’”…The plea system encourages defendants to engage in a cost-benefit assessment where, after evaluating the State’s evidence of guilt compared to the evidence available for his defense, a defendant may choose to plead guilty in hopes of a more lenient punishment than that imposed upon a defendant who disputes the overwhelming evidence of guilt at trial….As such, it is well accepted that the decision to plead guilty may be based on factors that have nothing to do with defendant’s guilt….Empirical data related to exonerations further prove that innocent people plead guilty, as 18% of all exonerees and 11% of those exonerated through DNA pled guilty….

Importantly, our rules allow the court to accept a plea of guilty even where defendant asserts his innocence, as long as a sufficient factual basis exists and the court satisfies the other requirements delineated in Illinois Supreme Court Rule 402…Unlike a conviction after trial, where the State’s evidence is scrutinized and must meet the beyond a reasonable doubt standard, the factual basis to support the plea is held to a less stringent level of proof, requiring only a basis from which the court could reasonably conclude that defendant actually committed the acts constituting the offense to which defendant is pleading guilty….

Accordingly, pleas are no more foolproof than trials….When met with a truly persuasive demonstration of innocence, a conviction based on a voluntary and knowing plea is reduced to a legal fiction….At that point, the additional due process afforded by the Illinois due process clause is triggered despite the legal construct-the entire plea proceedings including defendant’s waiver of all nonjurisdictional defects-that precludes a guilty-plea defendant’s claim….

Moreover, we emphasize this court’s long-established preference for life and liberty over holding defendant to his plea (emphases added).

-CM