People v. Urzua

Summary

The court held that granting appointed postconviction counsel’s motion to withdraw did not resolve the merits of the petition because the circuit court made no specific merits finding before the State filed a responsive pleading. The petitioner therefore remained entitled to proceed with retained counsel, who owed a reasonable level of assistance. Retained counsel’s failure to amend the petition or cure the defect in the supporting statement rebutted the presumption arising from the Rule 651(c) certificate, although the court reversed the direction to appoint new counsel because only one statutory appointment was authorized.