In People v. Brown, 2024 IL App (4th) 231395-U, the Illinois Appellate Court affirmed the dismissal of Cortez J. Brown’s latest “Motion for Ineffective Plea Counsel,” finding that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to consider the filing. Brown’s history of postconviction filings included several motions and petitions advancing meritless legal theories tied to the sovereign citizen movement, which were consistently dismissed by the courts.
Brown’s reliance on sovereign citizen arguments first emerged in a 2021 postconviction petition under the Post-Conviction Hearing Act. This petition, spanning 166 pages with a 323-page appendix, was dismissed by the trial court as frivolous and patently without merit. On appeal, the Second District described Brown’s claims as “based on the patently false legal theories of the ‘sovereign citizen’ movement and related groups.” The appellate court dismissed these arguments as legally unsound, reaffirming that such unconventional theories cannot form a valid basis for postconviction relief.
In 2023, Brown filed motions titled “Motion for Ineffective Plea Counsel,” asserting ineffective assistance of counsel without citing any statutory basis or linking his claims to established legal remedies. The motions were dismissed by the trial court, which explicitly declined to recharacterize them as postconviction petitions. Brown’s filings failed to meet the procedural requirements for recognized avenues of postconviction relief, such as petitions under section 2-1401 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure or the Post-Conviction Hearing Act. The appellate court similarly rejected these filings, emphasizing that the trial court had no jurisdiction to review motions rooted in frivolous and duplicative claims.
The appellate court affirmed the trial court’s dismissal and granted the Office of the State Appellate Defender’s motion to withdraw, concluding that Brown’s appeal raised no arguable legal issues.