JUSTICE GOLDENHERSH delivered the opinion of the court:

The defendant, Maurice Harper, was convicted of first-degree murder, after a bench trialin the circuit court of Jackson County. The defendant's appeal raises issues of whether the trialcourt erred in striking the defendant's motion to reconsider his posttrial motion. We reverseand remand.

The defendant and Daron Woods were both charged by information with the murder ofKenji Tipton. A public defender was appointed to represent the defendant. Before the trial,private counsel was substituted.

The defendant waived his right to a jury. On September 26, 2002, a one-day bench trialwas held. Woods was tried separately at a later date. The State presented several witnesseswho suggested that the defendant had provided Woods with a gun to shoot Tipton. Thedefendant was found guilty of first-degree murder.

The following day, while still represented by private counsel, the defendant filed amotion for a new trial. In the motion, the defendant contended that the State had failed todisclose an anonymous telephone call made by a witness, who later identified himself andtestified at the trial. Attached to the motion was a petition. The attachment addressed issuesnot argued in the motion. The attachment asserted that the witnesses for the State were biased,and it identified several people who were willing to testify on behalf of the defendant but werenot called upon. Attached to the petition were more than 100 purported signatures.

On October 23, 2002, the court entered an order denying the motion for a new trial. The court based its decision on the rationale that there is no requirement that all oralstatements, such as the anonymous phone call, be reduced to writing.

On November 25, 2002, attorney Paul Christenson moved for leave to substitutehimself as counsel for the defendant and moved for a continuance of the sentencing hearingscheduled for the next day. The court granted both requests.

On December 31, 2002, the defendant filed what was titled a motion to reconsider themotion for a new trial. The motion contended that new evidence and new occurrence witnesseshad been discovered. Attached to the motion were the affidavits of 12 individuals. Theaffidavits indicated that Woods' girlfriend, Carla Felten, had brought the handgun to Woods. Also attached was a police report from the Murphysboro police department regarding thequestioning of Felten about her possible involvement. Several affidavits suggested that one ofthe State's key witnesses had a history of personal animosity towards the defendant. The newmotion also alleged that defense counsel had ignored the defendant's request to testify in hisown defense. The defendant submitted an affidavit to that effect.

On January 2, 2003, the motion to reconsider proceeded to a hearing. The State movedto strike the motion. The court found the motion to be untimely. The court stated:

"The *** [m]otion for [n]ew [t]rial attempted to bootstrap new arguments onto the oldmotion. Unfortunately, the [c]ourt feels that that cannot be done. I believe that Mr.Christenson[-]by the time he got into this matter, the time had already run for the filingof the motions for new trial and that, therefore, the People's motion to strike the[m]otion to [r]econsider is granted and that the motion is struck [sic] from the record."

The court granted the defendant's request that the motion remain in the record for the purposesof appeal.

The court then conducted a sentencing hearing. The defendant was sentenced to 25years in the Department of Corrections. The defendant appeals.

Section 116-1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) provides therequirements for filing a motion for a new trial:

"