People v. Lesley
Annotate this CaseDefendant was indicted for unlawful possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver and three counts of unlawful delivery of a controlled substance. Defendant failed to cooperate with both an Assistant Public Defender (ADA) and private counsel, who withdrew. Defendant failed to appear and was taken into custody. The court appointed another ADA. who appeared twice, then informed the court that Defendant had not come into the office. The court urged Defendant to cooperate. In April 2013, while free on bond, defendant was arrested and charged with two additional counts of unlawful delivery of a controlled substance. In June 2013, Defendant pled guilty to two counts in exchange for consecutive sentences of five years’ and six years’ imprisonment. The state dismissed four additional charges. In September 2013, Defendant pro se filed a post-conviction petition alleging that counsel failed to adequately investigate and that no justification was given for consecutive sentences. Defendant appeared with ADA Cappellini and requested a long continuance because he and Cappellini had a disagreement. Cappellini stated that Defendant refused to listen to him. Additional continuances followed; after falling out with another ADA, Defendant was required to proceed pro se. The court denied his petition. The Illinois Supreme Court found waiver by conduct of Defendant’s right to representation. Defendant was expressly warned, several times, that he could lose his right to counsel through his continued conduct and then would be required to represent himself; he was granted 17 continuances. The court took extraordinary pains to accommodate his desire to retain private counsel. Defendant’s "dilatory efforts served to thwart the administration of justice" by further delay caused the court to require him to represent himself. Defendant’s continued refusal to cooperate constituted a knowing and intelligent election to proceed pro se.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.