83 Ill. 479 (Ill. 1876), Reynolds v. People

Citation:83 Ill. 479
Opinion Judge:Mr. Justice Scott.
Party Name:S. MARION REYNOLDS v. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
Attorney:Messrs. WILLIAMS, MCKENZIE & CALKINS, for the plaintiff in error. Mr. J. J. TUNNICLIFFE, State's Attorney, for the People.
Court:Supreme Court of Illinois
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 479

83 Ill. 479 (Ill. 1876)

S. MARION REYNOLDS

v.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

Supreme Court of Illinois, Northern Grand Division

September, 1876

WRIT OF ERROR to the Circuit Court of Warren county; the Hon. ARTHUR A. SMITH, Judge, presiding.

At the June term, 1876, of the Knox county circuit court, S. Marion Reynolds, J. W. Mageors alias Bob Mageors and John Kibby were jointly indicted for the larceny of a steer, the property of James Thomas. Kibby was permitted to give evidence on behalf of the State against his co-defendants, and was not himself arraigned. On the trial Mageors was found guilty of larceny, and his punishment fixed at three years in the penitentiary, and Reynolds was found guilty as "an accessory after the fact," with a recommendation he suffer the full penalty of the law. Motions for a new trial and in arrest of judgment were severally overruled and judgment pronounced on the verdict. Mageors was sentenced to the penitentiary for a period of three years, and Reynolds to pay a fine of $ 500, and to be confined in the county jail for a period of two years. Reynolds brings the case to this court on error.

Judgment reversed.

Messrs. WILLIAMS, MCKENZIE & CALKINS, for the plaintiff in error.

Mr. J. J. TUNNICLIFFE, State's Attorney, for the People.

OPINION

Mr. Justice Scott.

Page 480

It is very clear the conviction of Reynolds can not be sustained under the present indictment. Of the crime of larceny, for which he was indicted jointly with others, he was acquitted, but the principal being found guilty, he was found guilty as an "accessory after the fact." This conviction is without warrant of law.

An accessory is defined in the statute to be one "who stands by and aids, abets or assists, or who, not being present aiding, abetting or assisting, hath advised, encouraged, aided or abetted the perpetration of crime." One thus guilty is considered a principal and punished accordingly. An "accessory after the fact" is not punished, under our statute, as a principal. A less measure of punishment is provided. The definition given in the statute as well as at common law, makes a clear distinction in the offenses. Under our law, "every one not standing in the relation of husband or wife, parent or child, brother or sister to the offender, who knows the fact that a crime has been committed, and conceals it from the...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP