## Facts

- Alfred D. Robinson was charged in Illinois with drug offenses.
- During plea negotiations, the State offered to recommend an eight-year prison sentence if Robinson pleaded guilty.
- Robinson’s attorney, Terry Dodds, conveyed the eight-year offer to Robinson.
- Robinson told Dodds to ask the prosecutor whether the State would instead recommend a seven-year sentence and, if the prosecutor would not, to accept the State’s eight-year offer.
- Dodds refused to ask the State about a seven-year recommendation, and Dodds and Robinson argued because Robinson would not accept the eight-year offer without first making that request.
- Robinson later told Dodds he wanted to accept the State’s eight-year offer, but by then the offer had lapsed or had been withdrawn.
- Robinson went to trial, a jury convicted him, and the trial court sentenced him to 12 years in prison.
- After his direct appeal, Robinson filed a postconviction petition alleging ineffective assistance of counsel during plea negotiations, asserting that Dodds failed to communicate Robinson’s acceptance of the plea bargain to the State and failed to secure the plea agreement.
- The State moved to dismiss the petition at the second stage of postconviction proceedings, and the trial court granted the motion.
- Robinson appealed from the dismissal of his postconviction petition.

## Issues

1. Whether Robinson’s postconviction petition made a substantial showing that trial counsel provided ineffective assistance during plea negotiations by failing to communicate and effectuate Robinson’s acceptance of the State’s eight-year plea offer, such that second-stage dismissal was improper.

## Decision

- The appellate court reversed the trial court’s second-stage dismissal of Robinson’s postconviction petition.
- The appellate court remanded for further proceedings, concluding the petition sufficiently alleged deficient performance and resulting prejudice in the plea-bargaining process to require development of the claim rather than dismissal on the pleadings.

## Legal Principles

- A claim of ineffective assistance of counsel requires showing (1) deficient performance and (2) prejudice. *Strickland v. Washington*.
- In the plea-bargaining setting, counsel must provide constitutionally adequate assistance, including properly handling plea offers and communications that bear on whether a defendant can accept an offered disposition. *Missouri v. Frye*; *Lafler v. Cooper*.
- To show prejudice from lost plea opportunities, a defendant must plausibly allege a reasonable probability that (1) the defendant would have accepted the plea, (2) the prosecution would not have withdrawn it, (3) the trial court would have accepted it, and (4) the sentence under the plea would have been less severe than the sentence imposed after trial.
- Plea negotiations are generally evaluated using contract-law concepts, including offer, acceptance, lapse, and revocation, when deciding whether an agreement likely would have been reached and enforced.
- At the second stage of Illinois postconviction proceedings, the court treats well-pleaded factual allegations as true unless they are positively rebutted by the record; factual disputes and credibility questions ordinarily are addressed in later proceedings rather than resolved on a motion to dismiss.

## Conclusion

The Illinois Appellate Court reversed the dismissal of Robinson’s postconviction petition and remanded because Robinson’s verified allegations—that counsel refused to carry out instructions that would have preserved acceptance of the State’s eight-year offer and that Robinson received a longer 12-year sentence after trial—were sufficient at the second stage to state a colorable claim of ineffective assistance during plea bargaining.


People v. Robinson, 974 N.E.2d 978 (2012)