People v. Thompson

• Decision Date: 20 November 1978
• Docket Number: No. 77-209,77-209
• Citation: 22 Ill.Dec. 882,66 Ill.App.3d 141,383 N.E.2d 690
• Parties: , 22 Ill.Dec. 882 The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Glenn THOMPSON, Defendant-Appellant.
• Court: United States Appellate Court of Illinois

Page 690

383 N.E.2d 690

66 Ill.App.3d 141, 22 Ill.Dec. 882

The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Glenn THOMPSON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 77-209.

Appellate Court of Illinois, Fifth District.

Nov. 20, 1978.

Michael J. Rosborough, Deputy State App. Defender, Randy E. Blue, Asst. State App. Defender, Fifth Judicial District, Mount Vernon, for defendant-appellant.

Howard L. Hood, State's Atty., Murphysboro, Bruce D. Irish, Deputy Director, Martin N. Ashley, Staff Atty., State's Attys. App. Service Commission, Mount Vernon, for plaintiff-appellee.

EBERSPACHER, Presiding Justice:

On March 21, 1975, defendant, Glenn Thompson, was charged by information filed in the circuit court of Jackson County with the offense of public aid fraud in violation of Ill.Rev.Stat.1973, ch. 23, par. 11-21. The information alleged that the offense had been committed "from October, 1972, through March, 1973". Following a jury trial, defendant was found guilty and was sentenced to two years probation conditioned upon four weekends of periodic imprisonment. Defendant appeals the judgment entered.

The sole question raised by defendant is whether he was denied effective assistance of counsel by his appointed counsel's failure to move to dismiss the charge on the grounds that it was barred by the statute of limitations.

The facts underlying the offense are not in dispute. During the six month period alleged in the information, defendant was a recipient of public aid funds. He had, however, failed to report his change of circumstances consisting of his employment during that period and the income therefrom. During the period, he had received well over $1,000 in public aid.

The instant offense is a Class A misdemeanor. (Ill.Rev.Stat.1973, ch. 23, par. 11-21.) The applicable period of limitation to the prosecution of the offense is one and one half years after the commission of the offense. (Ill.Rev.Stat.1975, ch. 38, par. 3-5(b).) The instant charge, however, was brought two years after the offense was committed.

No motion to dismiss the information on this basis had been filed by defense counsel. Defendant contends that this failure, Ipso facto, constituted ineffective representation. We disagree.

Initially, we note that it is undisputed that in every other respect, the representation provided by counsel was competent and vigorous. To succeed in the single challenge raised, defendant must demonstrate that such was actual incompetence and that it resulted in substantial prejudice. (People v. Morris, 3 Ill.2d 437, 121 N.E.2d 810; People v. Goerger, 52 Ill.2d 403, 288 N.E.2d 416.) Further, our review of counsel's efficacy will not extend to matters involving the exercise of judgment,...