25 N.E. 764 (Ill. 1890), Parkinson v. People
|Citation:||25 N.E. 764, 135 Ill. 401|
|Opinion Judge:||BAKER, J.|
|Party Name:||PARKINSON v. PEOPLE. |
|Attorney:||[135 Ill. 402] Samuel W. Jackson, (Mills & Ingham, of counsel,) for plaintiff in error. George Hunt, Atty. Gen., for the People.|
|Case Date:||November 26, 1890|
|Court:||Supreme Court of Illinois|
Error to criminal court, Cook county.
Parkinson, the plaintiff in error, was indicted, tried, and convicted upon a charge of rape and sentenced to imprisonment in the penitentiary for a term of years. Motions for a new trial and in arrest of judgment were severally made and overruled, and exceptions taken.
It is shown by the record that the defendant was furnished with a copy of the indictment, and with lists of the names of the jurors and of the witnesses for the prosecution, and that thereupon a jury was impaneled and sworn to try the issue in the cause, and a witness for the prosecution sworn, and her examination commenced; that it was then suggested that no plea had been entered in the case, whereupon the defendant was arraigned and pleaded not guilty, and the trial was then proceeded with. The motion in arrest was based upon the facts above stated. The arraignment and plea of the defendant should be the first steps in the progress of a trial upon an indictment for a felony. They are essential to the formation of an issue to be tried by a jury. Where there is no issue, there is nothing to be tried, and nothing upon which the verdict of a jury or judgment and sentence of a court can properly be predicated. The statute (1 Starr & C. St. c. 38, div. 13, § 3) provides: 'Upon the arraignment of a prisoner, it shall be sufficient, [135 Ill. 403] without complying with any other form, to declare orally, by himself or his counsel, that he is not guilty, which plea shall be immediately entered upon the minutes of the court by the clerk; and the mention of the arraignment and such plea shall constitute the issue between the people of the state and the prisoner.' The formalities once attendant upon the arraignment of a prisoner are not now required; and it is sufficient if that which is done amounts, in substance, to an arraignment. Fitzpatrick v. People, 98 Ill. 260; Goodin v. State, 16 Ohio St. 344. But there must be a plea; and if a trial is had and no plea of any kind is interposed and shown by the record, it is reversible error. Johnson v. People, 22 Ill. 314; Aylesworth v. People, 65 Ill. 301; Yundt v. People, Id. 372; Hoskins v. People, 84 Ill. 87; Gould v. People, 89 Ill. 216. If, as matter of fact, there is an arraignment and plea prior to the impaneling of the jury, but a failure to make a...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP