178 N.E. 188 (Ill. 1931), 20623, People v. Simos

Docket Nº20623.
Citation178 N.E. 188, 345 Ill. 226
Opinion JudgeSTONE, C.J.
Party NamePEOPLE v. SIMOS et al.
Attorney[345 Ill. 227]Wm. Scott Stewart, of Chicago, for plaintiffs in error. Oscar E. Carlstrom, Atty. Gen., John A. Swanson, State's Atty., of Chicago, and J. J. Neiger, of Springfield (Edward E. Wilson, Henry T. Chace, Jr., Otho S. Fasig, and Charles A. Bellows, all of Chicago, of counsel), for the Pe...
Case DateOctober 23, 1931
CourtSupreme Court of Illinois

Page 188

178 N.E. 188 (Ill. 1931)

345 Ill. 226

PEOPLE

v.

SIMOS et al.

No. 20623.

Supreme Court of Illinois

October 23, 1931

Error to First Branch Appellate Court, First District, on Error to Criminal Court, Cook County; John J. Sullivan, Judge.

Mike Simos and others were convicted of conspiracy to suborn perjury, which judgment was affirmed by the Appellate Court (259 Ill.App. 253), and defendants bring error.

Affirmed.

Page 189

[345 Ill. 227]Wm. Scott Stewart, of Chicago, for plaintiffs in error.

Oscar E. Carlstrom, Atty. Gen., John A. Swanson, State's Atty., of Chicago, and J. J. Neiger, of Springfield (Edward E. Wilson, Henry T. Chace, Jr., Otho S. Fasig, and Charles A. Bellows, all of Chicago, of counsel), for the People.

STONE, C.J.

Plaintiffs in error were convicted in the criminal court of Cook county on a charge of conspiracy to suborn perjury by causing one Dorothy Fletcher to testify falsely to a material issue in a personal injury suit instituted by plaintiff in error Mike Simos against the Chicago Rapid Transit Company in the circuit court of Cook county. The jury fixed the punishment of Anthony Anton at imprisonment in the county jail for a term of one year, that of Mike [345 Ill. 228] Simos at imprisonment in the county jail for a term of nine months, and that of Caloedas at imprisonment in the penitentiary. Judgment was entered on these verdicts and was affirmed by the Appellate Court. The cause is here on writ of error.

Three errors are assigned in this court: (1) The court erred in refusing to permit proof concerning former jeopardy of plaintiffs in error; (2) crimes other than those charged in the indictment were proved or insinuated; (3) insufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict.

A trial was first begun before Hon. Thomas Taylor, Judge of the criminal court of Cook county, on March 4, 1929. After the jury was selected and sworn and some evidence taken, the court, by reason of matters occurring in the courtroom at that time, withdrew a juror and declared a mistrial. The jury was discharged and the case was later transferred to Hon. John J. Sullivan, judge of the criminal court of Cook county, and the trial was had on November 18 and 19, 1929, resulting in the conviction of plaintiffs in error. After the jury had been chosen and sworn and some testimony taken, counsel for plaintiffs in error sought to make proof of what occurred on the hearing before Judge Taylor at the time a mistrial was declared. On objection by the state's attorney, the court excused the jury, and counsel for plaintiffs in error stated that they offered to prove that the defendants in this case were placed on trial on the same indictment; that a jury was selected and sworn to try the issues and the state examined several witnesses; and that during the cross-examination of one of them the court, without fault of any of the defendants, on motion of the state's attorney, withdrew a juror and discharged the jury from further consideration of the case. The state's attorney thereupon stated that he wished the record to show that during the trial before Judge Taylor one of the jurors was asked if he knew any one connected with the state's attorney's office, [345 Ill. 229] and that he said he knew George Carmichael; that after the jury was sworn and impaneled, and during the course of the trial, said George Carmichael, formerly an assistant state's attorney, entered the courtroom, approached Pericles Caloedas, one of the defendants, slapped him on the back, shook hands with him, and turned and looked at this juror and waved at him; that the court was at that time fully cognizant of what had occurred and was of the opinion that an injustice would be done to the state if the trial continued; that counsel were asked if they had any objections to a new trial and a juror being withdrawn and new trial recorded; and that counsel for defendants said he was willing to allow that. Counsel for plaintiffs in error's reply to this offer of the state's attorney declared that counsel for defendants did not consent to the withdrawal of a juror. The court ruled that as what actually occurred before Judge Taylor would be disclosed by the transcript, and if the case went up for review that matter could be reviewed at the same time, it sustained objection to the proof. Counsel for plaintiffs in error here says that the only question arising on the claim of former jeopardy is whether Judge Sullivan

Page 190

erred in refusing to permit proof of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
26 practice notes
  • 70 N.E.2d 591 (Ill. 1946), 29652, People v. De Frates
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court of Illinois
    • November 20, 1946
    ...is within the discretion of the trial court and Page 595 is not subject to review in the absence of abuse of dcretion. People v. Simos, 345 Ill. 226, 178 N.E. 188; People v. Peplos, 340 Ill. 27, 172 N.E. 54; Dreyer v. People, 188 Ill. 40, 58 N.E. 620, 58 L.R.A. 869; United States v. Perez, ......
  • 150 N.W.2d 612 (Iowa 1967), 52368, State v. Theodore
    • United States
    • Iowa Supreme Court of Iowa
    • May 2, 1967
    ...(1960) 180 Cal.App.2d 19, 4 Cal.Rptr. 642, 655; People v. Darnell, (1950) 97 Cal.App.2d 630, 218 P.2d 172, 175; People v. Simos, (1931) 345 Ill. 226, 178 N.E. 188, 192; United States v. Iacullo, 226 F.2d 788, 793; Commonwealth v. Evans, 190 Pa.Super. 179, 154 A.2d 57. See comments by C.J.Wa......
  • 359 N.E.2d 1070 (Ill.App. 5 Dist. 1977), 75--475, People v. Cunitz
    • United States
    • Illinois Court of Appeals of Illinois
    • January 13, 1977
    ...was confined could be submitted and determined from the record by the court at the time of the sentence hearing. Cf. People v. Simos, 345 Ill. 226, 178 N.E. 188; People v. Brown, 354 Ill. 480, 188 N.E. 529. Defendant next asserts that it was plain error for the prosecution to cross-examine ......
  • 193 N.E.2d 806 (Ill. 1963), 37817, People v. Laws
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court of Illinois
    • September 27, 1963
    ...be defeated.' (See: People v. Friason, 22 Ill.2d 563, 177 N.E.2d 230; People v. Touhy, 361 Ill. 332, 197 N.E. 849; People v. Simos, 345 Ill. 226, 178 N.E. 188.) And while recognizing that the ruling of the trial court granting a mistrial is not subject to review in the absence of an abuse o......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
26 cases
  • 70 N.E.2d 591 (Ill. 1946), 29652, People v. De Frates
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court of Illinois
    • November 20, 1946
    ...is within the discretion of the trial court and Page 595 is not subject to review in the absence of abuse of dcretion. People v. Simos, 345 Ill. 226, 178 N.E. 188; People v. Peplos, 340 Ill. 27, 172 N.E. 54; Dreyer v. People, 188 Ill. 40, 58 N.E. 620, 58 L.R.A. 869; United States v. Perez, ......
  • 150 N.W.2d 612 (Iowa 1967), 52368, State v. Theodore
    • United States
    • Iowa Supreme Court of Iowa
    • May 2, 1967
    ...(1960) 180 Cal.App.2d 19, 4 Cal.Rptr. 642, 655; People v. Darnell, (1950) 97 Cal.App.2d 630, 218 P.2d 172, 175; People v. Simos, (1931) 345 Ill. 226, 178 N.E. 188, 192; United States v. Iacullo, 226 F.2d 788, 793; Commonwealth v. Evans, 190 Pa.Super. 179, 154 A.2d 57. See comments by C.J.Wa......
  • 359 N.E.2d 1070 (Ill.App. 5 Dist. 1977), 75--475, People v. Cunitz
    • United States
    • Illinois Court of Appeals of Illinois
    • January 13, 1977
    ...was confined could be submitted and determined from the record by the court at the time of the sentence hearing. Cf. People v. Simos, 345 Ill. 226, 178 N.E. 188; People v. Brown, 354 Ill. 480, 188 N.E. 529. Defendant next asserts that it was plain error for the prosecution to cross-examine ......
  • 193 N.E.2d 806 (Ill. 1963), 37817, People v. Laws
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court of Illinois
    • September 27, 1963
    ...be defeated.' (See: People v. Friason, 22 Ill.2d 563, 177 N.E.2d 230; People v. Touhy, 361 Ill. 332, 197 N.E. 849; People v. Simos, 345 Ill. 226, 178 N.E. 188.) And while recognizing that the ruling of the trial court granting a mistrial is not subject to review in the absence of an abuse o......
  • Request a trial to view additional results