Drew Peterson appeal of murder conviction to be filed soon

UPDATE: 1/13/14: Steven Greenberg reports that he has mailed the appeal.

Drew Peterson’s attorneys have until January 14, 2014 to file an appeal of his conviction for the murder of Kathleen Savio.

Although limited to 50 pages, they have been asking permission to submit something more along the lines of a novella – 175 pages: 50 pages outlining the facts of the case and another 125 pages of arguments. Apparently they feel that the publicity garnered by the case merits a more verbose appeal. Or perhaps the inflated egos of Peterson’s battling counselors require bloated prose. Whatever the case, the third district appellate court has again shot down the request and they will be obliged to stick to the limit.

Peterson’s appeal is set to be filed within the next three weeks but the oral arguments for and against are not expected to be heard until late 2014.

Attorney Steven Greenberg says that the appeal will focus on hearsay evidence which was admitted to trial and on allegations of ineffective counsel. Motions filed after Peterson’s conviction and prior to his sentencing asked for a re-trial on the same grounds but were denied by Judge Edward Burmila.

Chicago Tribune


32 thoughts on “Drew Peterson appeal of murder conviction to be filed soon

  1. I still find it a bit ironic that Steven Greenberg is on the appeal team. 175 pages verses a 50 page limit???????? Blah! Blah! Blah!

  2. At the end of that clip it’s said that Drew is in his cell in solitary 23 hours of every day. So I wonder how it is that in his letters he is able to send people lists of inmates at Menard who are interested in having pen pals? Obviously, he has some contact with other prisoners…

  3. Stilllearning, I have to wonder if there is any precedent for such a hefty appeal (or attempt at one). I mean, this certainly is not the most complex or lengthy murder trial in Illinois, right?

  4. It’s interesting to me how although Drew’s defense has not been very effective in court, they’ve done very well at disseminating misinformation via the media.

    It’s mind-boggling how many people believe that Drew hasn’t been given a fair shake in court, has been denied his constitutional rights, and that a special law was used in order to convict him.

    All those years of mouthing off in front of cameras and to reporters has resulted in popular misconceptions that live on in the comment threads attached to every news story posted about the case.

    Peterson’s defense team knows better than anyone that the statute they dubbed “Drew’s Law” was not the basis for the admission of hearsay evidence to trial, which is why the appeal is going to focus on allegations of breaches of marital privilege, or confidentiality (Neil Schori) and of ineffective counsel (Joel Brodksy).

    I find it shameful that this team of seasoned lawyers made it their agenda to spread lies to the public (which gained their client nothing) when they could have just done their jobs in court. It was all about getting camera time, marketing themselves to new clients, making more money with no regard for integrity or the truth.

  5. Facs, I agree, The media mistruths, the disrepectfulness to the victims and the families, the inappropriate joking and comments, landed their client in the pen. (where he belongs)
    I do wish the judge would ban the jury members from talking to the media.
    Steven Greenberg’s comment regardingt the number of attorneys on a case “makes no difference in filing ineffective counsel,” makes one wonder why Drew Peterson always needs so attorneys in the first place.

  6. Drew Peterson had the benefit of legal counsel that most defendants can only dream of. Not only that, they filed motion after motion over three years, picking at every piece of evidence. Every bit of evidence at trial had been challenged in every possible way before it ever got to the trial. The idea that now it’s going to reverse his conviction is just ludicrous.

    I agree SL2, that the behavior of Drew’s attorneys was unforgivable but I have to disagree about it landing their client in prison. He got there all by himself, because of his actions. A jury of his peers decided he was guilty based on the evidence.

    My point was that since Drew’s trial was going to take place in the courtroom and not in front of the cameras and not decided by the public, there was no reason for his lawyers to misrepresent the facts and play to the cameras with callous and hurtful statements. That didn’t figure into the verdict one way or another. That was all to make sure the cameras were pointed at them and they were the only ones to benefit from it (publicity). It didn’t help Drew and it sure as hell didn’t help the victims or their families.

  7. Good correction on my post, Facs.
    It should have read “Despite ….” “the evidence still landed ….”
    Drew is where he is because of his own actions. Period.

  8. WordPress has compiled the stats for the blog for 2013. I want to say a big thank you to those who have stuck in there with me and continued to visit and participate in Justice Cafe. Warmest hugs. I’ll do my best to keep the place updated whenever there is news.

    Here are the 5 most active commenters of 2013:

    1 lostacres 200 COMMENTS
    2 bucketoftea 140 COMMENTS
    3 harleyjoey 113 COMMENTS
    4 Anna Hultin 109 COMMENTS
    5 atlgranny 93 COMMENTS

  9. To the person who likes to del. my post I guess you just can”t handle the truth! when I wrote about Druppy and his son reciving his fathers pension!I don’t belive that he or his son should get it! But you must like the Petersons? People need to write to the BOLLINGBROOK PENSION BOARD AT 375 WEST BRIARCLIFF ROAD – BOLLINGBROOK,IL. 60440.

  10. Mitchell, None of your posts were deleted.

    The last comment from you is here.

    If you want to continue to post comments on this site, please refrain from insults and make sure that you aren’t lashing out without justification.


  11. Hoping 2014 is good for all! I still come to read from time to time and continue to pray that Stacy’s family and friends find her. I never knew her but anytime I hear the song “It’s Too Late to Apologize” I think about her. I still do Google searches to see if she is found and every now and again a story will come up that makes me wonder. Usually when I look here – Facs already has the story posted. I saw a story today that gave me the weird feeling I haven’t had in a while. It is a far stretch but remains have been found in a storage facility in Lexington, KY, and Federal investigators were the ones who reached out to local authorities according to the articles I have seen. I remember KY for some reason and when I looked back I found that Florence, KY, is where there was an alleged sighting of Stacy with a man by a mall. The sad truth is there are so many families missing loved ones that it is probably not her but I still never forget her, her sister, or her kids. Here is the link to one of the artciles => http://www.nbcnews.com/id/54016982/

  12. Nice to hear from you, TAI. Isn’t it funny how some little thing can bring you right back to that intense year after Stacy went missing and all the emotions and personalities that filled it?

    I’m interested in the appeal that will be filed next week and I’ll be following the news but I don’t feel any nervousness about it. I have every confidence that Drew Peterson will remain in prison for the rest of his days.

    As for Kentucky, Drew also told Lenny (while the latter was pretending to be a woman named Ashley) that he wanted to live in Lexington, Kentucky.

    At least Drew for once is telling the truth and that is we never met , we never talked on the phone , just instant messages SO why would your client tell me he loves me – that him & his kids need me in their lives -ask me to move to Lexington Kentucky ( because thats where he thinks he is going to move to

    This is what Paula said:

    “He wanted to move to Kentucky and put a business and a house in my name in case they came to get him,” she said. “I said, ‘You plan to take me to Kentucky? You think Lenny’s going to let me go without a fight? You know how he is.’ He said, ‘Don’t make me shoot him.’”

    Drew mentioned wanting to move to Kentucky (and also California) to Derek Armstrong as well.

    He told another amorous pen pal that Michigan was too cold for him and that he wanted to live in a warmer climate. Maybe he just wanted to retire in the South like a lot of people.

    I suppose it’s possible that he could have had Stacy’s remains moved to that locale, expecting to move there himself and to then permanently dispose of them at some point. It’s a stretch, but that’s interesting. Thanks for posting the link. I’ll take a look at the story.

  13. This story calls Peilet a former attorney for Drew Peterson, but AFAIK he was rehired in July of last year to work on Peterson’s appeal.

    Former lawyer for Peterson faces new discipline charge
    Appeals court says lawyer has ignored its orders

    … new charges against (David) Peilet involve a matter before the 3rd District Appellate Court. The court filed a complaint with the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission after finding Peilet had repeatedly ignored its orders and missed deadlines for an appeal he was handling.

    The court eventually removed him from the case for those violations.

    Peilet agreed in April to serve two years of disciplinary probation along with a two-year suspension of his law license to settle state disciplinary charges alleging he had stolen a client’s money. The sentence allowed him to get his license back after three months and keep it as long as he complies with the terms of his probation.

    He later repaid the client $3,000, which both sides agreed was full restitution, records show. Peilet said in court papers that he was suffering from alcohol addiction at the time of the theft but has since undergone treatment and stopped drinking.


  14. It looks like Peilet hasn’t complied with all the conditions of the initial complaint back in April 2013. You can read the new ARDC complaint here:


    Respondent has engaged in the following misconduct:

    a. failure to respond to a lawful demand for information from the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission, by not responding to the Administrator’s letters requesting information, and not complying with the Administrator’s subpoena, in violation of Rule 8.1(b) of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct; and

    b. engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice, by not responding to the Administrator’s letters requesting information, and not complying with the Administrator’s subpoena, in violation of Rule 8.4(d).

  15. This month Stacy will be 30 yrs. old..her children will be 9 and 11,,,it makes me sad and angry at the same time..the children don’t have a mother and DP is still making headlines .and he expects to be free..the fact he is in a secluded cell for 23 hrs, a day is a bonus..I’m looking forward to the day when his appeals are over and maybe then we’ll find Stacy..

  16. Drew Peterson’s lawyer has mailed the former Chicago-area police officer’s appeal of his conviction for killing his third wife.

    Attorney Steve Greenberg said the appeal was sent in Monday — a day before the 3rd District Appellate Court’s deadline….

    …A copy of the 55-page appeal that Greenberg provided cites, among other things, prosecutors’ reliance on hearsay evidence.


  17. …”The State did not present a single eyewitness, physical evidence linking Drew with Kathleen’s body, forensic evidence linking Drew with Kathleen’s body, or a confession from Drew,” the 55-page appeal says. “And while it is true there is no magic formula for a murder conviction, at least one of these pieces of evidence is usually present where an appellate court upholds murder convictions.”…

    …Peterson’s appeal singles out one witness, divorce attorney Harry Smith, as sealing Peterson’s fate at trial. The defense had hoped that Smith’s testimony would discredit Stacy Peterson, because he said she had asked him if she could squeeze more money out of Peterson in a divorce if she threatened to tell police he killed Savio. Instead, the testimony stressed to jurors that Stacy Peterson seemed to truly believe her husband killed Savio.

    The appeal argues that not only did then-lead defense attorney Joel Brodsky err in calling Smith, but the judge did as well by allowing the testimony.

    “The court knew the witness was going to devastate the defense … knew it was legal suicide to call Smith,” the appeal says. “The court should not have blithely stepped aside simply because the defense wanted to call the witness.”

    A message was left with Brodsky on Monday night seeking comment. He’s adamantly denied mistakes at trial and has said all Peterson’s attorneys agreed with the decision to put Smith on the stand.

    A spokesman for the Will County’s state’s attorney’s office, which prosecuted Peterson, said prosecutors had not seen the appeal and could not comment. But Charles Pelkie added, “We are confident in this case and we are confident that it will stand up appeal.”


  18. Reached late Monday, Brodsky noted Peterson himself told the judge in court he wanted Smith to testify.

    “I am confident that Drew got the best defense a person could get and that the appellate court will find he did not have ineffective assistance,” he said. “Mr. Greenberg’s appeal strategy is a losing strategy.”

Comments are closed.