Opinion

People v. Ward

  • 187 Ill. 2d 249
  • 240 Ill. Dec. 636
  • 718 N.E.2d 117
  • 1999 Ill. LEXIS 679
Court
Illinois Supreme Court
Filed
Jun 17, 1999
Status
Published
Author
Harrison
On the bench
Harrison, Rathje
Cited by
109 cases
Authority
More cited than 4.9%

stating that what evidence to produce at sentencing is a strategic decision and generally immune from claims of ineffective assistance

How later courts described this case

  • stating that what evidence to produce at sentencing is a strategic decision and generally immune from claims of ineffective assistance
  • no ineffectiveness shown where claimed deficiencies by counsel did not result in reversible errors
  • decisions on what evidence to present are matters of trial strategy
  • no reasonable probability that outcome would have been altered in light of overwhelming evidence

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

JUSTICE HARRISON, concurring in part and dissenting in part:

I agree that the allegations in Ward’s post-conviction petition and the supporting affidavits provide no cognizable basis for disturbing his convictions. In my view, however, his sentence of death cannot be allowed to stand. For the reasons set forth in my dissent in People v. Bull, 185 Ill. 2d 179 (1998), this state’s present death penalty law does not meet the requirements of the eighth and fourteenth amendments to the United States Constitution (U.S. Const., amends. VIII, XIV) or article I, section 2, of the Illinois Constitution (Ill. Const. 1970, art. I, § 2). To the extent that the circuit court rejected Ward’s challenge to the validity of his death sentence, its judgment should therefore be reversed, Ward’s sentence of death should be vacated, and Ward should be sentenced to a term of imprisonment. Ill. Rev. Stat. 1983, ch. 38, par. 9—1(j). There is no need to remand for an additional sentencing hearing. Because Ward has been found guilty of murdering more than one victim, a term of natural life imprisonment is mandatory. Ill. Rev. Stat. 1983, ch. 38, par. 1005—8—1(a)(1)(c).

For the foregoing reasons, I would affirm the judgment of the circuit court in part and reverse it in part. I would not disturb any of Ward’s convictions, nor would I alter the sentences imposed on him by the circuit court for armed robbery and possession of a stolen motor vehicle. I would, however, vacate his death sentence and sentence him to a term of natural life imprisonment.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.