People v. Nash

── People v. Nash ── Court: Appellate Court of Illinois Date: May 14, 2026 Category: General NOTICE 2026 IL App (5th) 241334-U NOTICE Decision filed 05/14/26. The This order was filed under text of this decision may be NO. 5-24-1334 Supreme Court Rule 23 and is changed or corrected prior to the filing of a Petition for not precedent except in the Rehearing or the disposition of IN THE limited circumstances allowed the same. under Rule 23(e)(1). APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIFTH DISTRICT ______________________________________________________________________________ THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) Appeal from the ) Circuit Court of Plaintiff-Appellee, ) Macon County. ) v. ) No. 23-CF-1713 ) LAURA J. NASH, ) Honorable ) Rodney S. Forbes, Defendant-Appellant. ) Judge, presiding. ______________________________________________________________________________ JUSTICE CLARKE delivered the judgment of the court. Justices Vaughan and Hackett concurred in the judgment. ORDER ¶1 Held: Where there is no issue of arguable merit that could reasonably lead to a reversal or modification of the judgment of conviction, this court grants the defendant’s appointed appellate counsel leave to withdraw and affirms the judgment of conviction. ¶2 The defendant, Laura J. Nash, appeals from her conviction and sentence for possession of methamphetamine. Her attorney, the Office of the State Appellate Defender (OSAD), has concluded that this appeal has no arguable merit. Accordingly, OSAD has filed a motion for leave to withdraw as counsel, along with a supporting brief, pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). The defendant has filed a response. Agreeing with OSAD’s assessment of this case, this court grants OSAD leave to withdraw and affirms the circuit court’s judgment of conviction. 1 ¶3 I. BACKGROUND ¶4 The defendant was charged with several felony counts. These felony counts included, inter alia, three counts involving the possession of firearms and one count of possession of 400 or more grams but less than 900 grams of a substance containing methamphetamine. This last offense was a Class X felony punishable by imprisonment for a term between 8 and 40 years. See 720 ILCS 646/60(a), (b)(5) (West 2022). The trial court appointed trial counsel for the defendant. ¶5 A jury trial was set for October 21, 2024. On that day, just prior to voir dire, the State moved to dismiss all the counts against the defendant, except for the count charging her with possession of 400 or more grams but less than 900 grams of a substance containing methamphetamine. Without objection, the trial court granted the motion to dismiss. The cause was called for trial on the remaining count. At trial, the defendant’s defense was that she did not constructively possess the methamphetamine-containing substance. ¶6 During the voir dire stage of the trial, the trial court instructed the veniremembers about four “vital principles of law and procedure.” The judge stated: “O