People v. Jones

• Decision Date: 30 November 1967
• Docket Number: Gen. No. 40376
• Citation: 38 Ill.2d 384,231 N.E.2d 390
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Appellee, v. Joe Nathan JONES, Appellant.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

Page 390

231 N.E.2d 390

38 Ill.2d 384

The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Appellee, v. Joe Nathan JONES, Appellant.

Gen. No. 40376.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Nov. 30, 1967.

Joe Nathan Jones, pro se.

HOUSE, Justice.

We have granted defendant's petition for leave to appeal from the decision of the Appellate Court, Fifth District, affirming his conviction for theft (76 Ill.App.2d 20, 221 N.E.2d 510), in order to determine whether that court properly permitted defendant's appointed appellate counsel to withdraw from the case.

In the recent case of Anders v. State of California, the Supreme Court stated, '* * * if counsel finds his (defendant's) case to be wholly frivolous, after a conscientious examination of it, he (counsel) should so advise the court and request permission to withdraw. That request must, however, be accompanied by a brief referring to anything in the record that might arguably support the appeal. A copy of counsel's brief should be furnished the indigent and time allowed him to raise any points that he chooses; the court--not counsel--then proceeds, after a full examination of all the proceedings, to decide whether the case is wholly frivolous. If it so finds it may grant counsel's request to withdraw and dismiss the appeal insofar as federal requirements are concerned, or proceed to a decision on the merits, if state law so requires.' 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 1400, 18 L.Ed.2d 493, 498.

Pursuant to the Anders decision, an attorney seeking to withdraw from a case because he has decided the appeal is without merit must file a supporting brief or memorandum analyzing the case legally, citing record references to the transcript and any cases upon which he relies in arriving at his ultimate conclusion. The memorandum or brief of counsel's investigation and evaluation of the appeal should cover not only points his client has raised, or wishes to raise, but in addition 'anything in the record that might arguably support the appeal.'

Defendant's counsel did, as a part of his motion for leave to withdraw as counsel, recite the essential facts of the case, list the points defendant wanted to raise and cite cases in support of his conclusion that there was no merit to the points raised. The Appellate Court reviewed the entire record and, in deciding the case on its merits, agreed with appointed counsel that there was no merit to the issues raised.

The motion filed by appointed counsel and the Appellate Court decision were both prior to Anders. Nevertheless, both counsel and the court substantially complied with Anders. The motion counsel filed covered the issues defendant raised and it is implicit both in his motion and in the opinion of the Appellate Court that there was nothing which might arguably support an appeal.

The transcript of proceedings is only 12 pages in length. At the arraignment on March 18 defendant pleaded not guilty and stated he was represented by counsel. The court appointed two public defenders to represent him pending the entry of appearance by his retained counsel. On March 30 defendant appeared with his retained counsel, who said defendant wanted to withdraw his plea of not guilty and enter a plea of guilty. The court admonished defendant of his rights and of the possible...