People v. Duncan

Decision Date29 May 1968
Docket NumberNo. 38666,38666
PartiesThe PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, v. James Richard DUNCAN, Plaintiff in Error.
CourtIllinois Supreme Court

William J. Cooney, Chicago, Appointed by the Court, for plaintiff in error.

William G. Clark, Atty. Gen., Springfield, and John J. Stamos, State's Atty., Chicago (Fred G. Leach, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Elmer C. Kissane and James R. Truschke, Asst. State's Attys., of counsel), for defendant in error.

HOUSE, Justice.

A jury in the circuit court of Cook County found defendant, James Richard Duncan, guilty of the murder of Samuel Schwartz and fixed his punishment at imprisonment for a term of 30 years. A constitutional question gives us jurisdiction.

About 10:00 P.M. on October 4, 1959, Samuel Schwartz, a 15-year-old boy, was stabbed and killed on the elevated platform of the Chicago Transit Authority at 22nd Street and State Street in Chicago. There were no witnesses to the murder. The People's evidence connecting defendant with the crime was the testimony of two boys Carl Remmer and Louis Mayberry, who said that shortly after 10:00 P.M. on that night they saw defendant at 2222 South State Street and he told them he had just killed a 'stud' on the 22nd Street elevated station a few minutes before and produced the knife he used. A written confession given to the police on November 12, 1959, was also admitted in evidence.

Defendant denied making an oral confession to the youths who testified for the People and said that the written confession to the police was coerced. He said he was at a dance from 8:30 P.M. until midnight on the night of the murder. Six other youths corroborated his alibi. However, four teenage girls testified that defendant was at the elevated station shortly before the murder, although two of the girls on cross-examination could not fix the time they had seen defendant.

Defendant first argues that his written confession was coerced by the police officers. He testified that on October 9 he was taken to the police station with other boys from his housing project and questioned about the murder from about 5 P.M. until 10 P.M. and on October 17 he was again taken to the police station and questioned about the murder for about 3 or 4 hours. On October 21 defendant was arrested for disorderly conduct. (While the record is not clear on the point, it would appear that defendant and two companions were using profane language in the elevated station at 58th Street. A police officer talked with them, defendant argued with the officer and only he was arrested.) He was taken to a judge, his case was continued to November 12 and he was held in custody at the House of Correction pending his trial on the disorderly conduct charge. After he was there three days, he was put into the 'hole' for talking when the lights were out. The 'hole' was described as a cell with no bed and the prisoner is fed only one meal a day at 3:00 P.M. Defendant was confined in the 'hole' until the morning of November 12 when he was taken to court about 9:00 A.M. on the disorderly conduct charge. The judge had him sign a peace bond and he was released. As he was leaving the courtroom, two police officers took him to the eighth floor of the same building.

The police began questioning him about 9:30 A.M. Defendant claims he was slapped several times and threatened with brass knuckles. The police officers all denied that there was any physical violence or threat of physical violence. The questioning continued until about 1:30 P.M. when defendant confessed, and about that time he...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Duncan v. Nelson
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit
    • 10 Octubre 1972
    ... ... 1526, 18 L. Ed.2d 704 (1957); Dacey v. New York County Lawyers' Ass'n, 423 F.2d 188 (2d Cir. 1970), cert. denied, 398 U.S. 929, 90 S.Ct. 1819, 26 L.Ed.2d 92 (1970). The district court, however, in dismissing this cause also took notice of the opinion of the Illinois Supreme Court in People v. Duncan, 40 Ill.2d 105, 238 N.E.2d 595 (1968), which set aside plaintiff's earlier conviction. The district court presumably accepted as true the facts found in that opinion and related those facts in dismissing this cause in the district court. In People v. Duncan, supra, the court found as ... ...
  • People v. Jackson
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • 22 Noviembre 1968
    ... ... Harper, 36 Ill.2d 398, 402, 223 N.E.2d 841; People v. Thomlison, 400 Ill. 555, 561, 81 N.E.2d 434), and that the trial court need not be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt. People v. Duncan, 40 Ill.2d 105, 107, 238 N.E.2d 595 ...         It is evident here that defendant's confession was not affected by the rules promulgated in the Escobedo and Miranda cases (Escobedo v. Illinois, 378 U.S. 478, 84 S.Ct. 1758, 12 L.E.2d 977; Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 ... ...
  • Meca Magnetics, Inc. v. Industrial Commission
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • 29 Mayo 1968
1 books & journal articles
  • Miranda deconstitutionalized: when the Self-Incrimination Clause and the Civil Rights Act collide.
    • United States
    • University of Pennsylvania Law Review Vol. 143 No. 2, December 1994
    • 1 Diciembre 1994
    ...plaintiff's earlier conviction, finding it unnecessary to reach his allegations of physical violence and threats. See People v. Duncan, 238 N.E.2d 595 (Ill. 1968); see also Duncan, 466 F.2d at 941. Since there had been no finding on this issue, the federal appellate court held that the plai......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT