Aneals v. People

• Decision Date: 01 November 1890
• Citation: 25 N.E. 1022,134 Ill. 401
• Parties: ANEALS et al. v. PEOPLE.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

134 Ill. 401

25 N.E. 1022

ANEALS et al.

v.PEOPLE.¹

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Nov. 1, 1890.

Error to circuit court, Adams county; WILLIAM MARSH, Judge.

Indictment for assault with intent to commit murder. The instructions referred to in the opinion were as follows: ‘The court instructs the jury that in determining the question whether the defendants William Aneals and Louis Stormer were or were not at another place, or at other places, at the time of the alleged assault, they should not be governed alone by the testimony of the witnesses introduced to prove an alibi, but that it is the duty of the jury to consider all the evidence in the case before them, and unless the jury, after considering all the facts and circumstances in evidence before them, have a reasonable doubt as to the presence of the defendants William Aneals and Louis Stormer at the home of James Knox at the time of the assault, that then the jury should not permit the defense of an alibi to avail said last-named defendants.’‘The court instructs the jury that the theory of an alibi in this case is that the defendants were so far removed from the scene of the alleged assault at the time of its commission as to make it impossible that they could have committed it; and even although the jury may believe from the evidence in the case that the defendants were at other and different places than the scene of the assault on the same evening such assault, if any, was made, nevertheless, if the jury further believe from the evidence in the case beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendants could have reasonably been at the place of such assault at the time thereof, and also at such other place or places, on the same evening, and at the time or times mentioned by the witnesses in the case, that then the defense of an alibi cannot avail the defendants.’John H. Williams

and Charles M. Gilmer, for plaintiffs in error.

George Hunt, Atty. Gen., for the People.

SHOPE, C. J.

At the May term, 1889, of the Adams circuit court, Francis Asbury Aneals, William Aneals, and Louis Stormer were indicted for an assault upon James Knox, with intent to commit murder. At the September term, 1889, the trial resulted in a verdict of guilty, fixing the term of Asbury and William Aneals, severally, at 18 months in the penitentiary, and the defendant Stormer at 1 year. A motion for a new trial was sustained as to Asbury Aneals, but overruled as to the other defendants, and they were severally sentenced on the verdict. They prosecute this writ of error.

The first contention is that the verdict should have been set aside because the proof failed to sustain it. No question is made that there is ample proof of the corpus delicti. The only question of fact is as to the identity of the persons who committed the assault. On April 27, 1889, about 8 o'clock in the evening, while James Knox and his family were at the supper table, two masked men entered the house, and saying only, ‘Hold,’ fired two shots at Knox from a revolver, each firing one shot, one taking effect in the nose of Knox, the other missing him and passing out through a window. The assailants then backed out of the house, drew shut the door, and disappeared. There were present James Knox, his wife, Samuel Knox, a brother of James, Miss Agnes Lagee, and Miss Hattie Wibble. The latter two had just risen from the table. Miss Lagee was within four feet, and possibly nearer the smaller, of the two assailants. One of the assailants was considerably larger than the other. The larger one came in first, but the smaller one stepped furthest into the room. Samuel Knox was 10 or 12 foot from the door at which the assailants entered, which was on the south side of the room, winding the clock which hung on the west wall of the room. James Knox was unable to identify either of the assailants, and unable to give any description of them, except that the smaller of the two was a man from 5 feet 6 to 8 inches high, weighing 130 or 140 pounds, ‘longish neck,’ shoulders not broad but square. Miss Lagee, who was nearer than the others, says that one was quite a little smaller than the other in size, build, and height; that she noticed the eyes of the smaller one particularly through his mask. She also noticed that the hair of one of the assailants was dark, and the other light. On the following Saturday morning, this witness and others went to Aneals' and Stormer's to see if they could identify any one. She says that Stormer's build and size resembled very much the size and build of the smaller of the assailants. He had light blue eyes, and a peculiar stare about them ‘that I noticed particularly that night.’ She also states that the eyes were rather small, and through the mask they seemed rather round than oval. The larger of the two men had dark eyes and hair. Both wore light, brown-gray suits, and hats the same color. The larger one had a large hat; the other a small one. The larger one had square shoulders, was firmly built, and straight. She testified that the description of the larger one answers to that of William Aneals ‘very well.’ She was unable to recognize any one as the assailant, but testified that the two defendants, William Aneals and Louis Stormer, resembled the parties who made the assault. On the motion for a new trial, she filed an affidavit stating that she did not believe that the defendants were the assaulting parties, and did not intend to be so understood in giving her testimony. Miss Wibble was unable to identify any one, while she agrees with the other witness in the main as to the description of the persons who made the assault. Samuel Knox testified that he had known William Aneals from infancy, and was familiar with his size, form, and general appearance. He describes particularly the clothing and hats of the assailants, and says he saw William Aneals wear a hat like the one described by him, on May 6th, in Quincy. He saw him clearly at the time of the shooting. Saw none of his face but his chin, and that resembled the chin of William Aneals. He testified that he thought he knew these men, and was satisfied from what he saw that William Aneals was one of them. On cross-examination of this witness, much occurred that might very properly weaken the force of his testimony.

It is made to appear with reasonable certainty that no one came out onto the road or public highway in front of the house immediately after the shooting; but back of the house, near the hedge, it was found that two horses had been hitched, and an opening had been made through a rail fence, and that horses had passed through the same going north. The rails had been recently let down, and horses led or ridden over them. On the fence were found prints of horses' feet, and black and bay horse-hair. The horse tracks led in the general direction of where Aneals and Stormer lived; that is, northerly. One of the horses that made these tracks had two shoes behind, and one in front. The other was shod in front only. The large tracks were made by the horse having three shoes. Knox lived on the east side of section 15. To go to Aneals' through the fields would be from a mile and a half to two miles north, and a half mile west. The witness Carroll had been at Ingraham's, substantially a half a mile west from William Aneals', and was at the gate ‘at the corner’ about 200 yards from Aneals' house, where the road turns north to Bloomfield. At about 8:30 o'clock he saw two persons on horse-back coming from the south, and which would be from the general direction of Knox's going north. At the corner mentioned the riders turned east. He thought he recognized one of them as the defendant William Aneals, and called to him by name, but received no reply. He also thought that he recognized the horse next to him, the larger of the two horses, and it was, as he thought, the horse that William Aneals had shortly before that purchased of Louis Fogle. It was moderstely dark, and the moon not shining. The persons were riding in a ‘fair lope.’ Two witnesses examined the horse tracks found near Knox's house, and in the field. Subsequently, the witnesses Carroll and Hunter examined William Aneals' horses, and found a large mare belonging to him, with two shoes behind and one in front, which Carroll testifies was the Fogle mare, and whose feet, they testify, compared exactly with the larger tracks found at the fence and in the field near Knox's house. One witness, at least, went to Asbury Aneals' barn, and found a horse, shod in front, and bare behind, the tracks of which were apparently the same as the tracks of the other horse found back of Knox's house, and in the field. The horsehair found at the fence was of the same general color as the hair upon the legs of the two horses mentioned by the witnesses. On Thursday following the shooting, Carroll saw the Fogle mare at William Aneals', and the hair had been cut off her legs, when, however, does not appear. The evidence shows that, a short time prior to the assault, Asbury Aneals and James Knox had had some difficulty over local political affairs. Much ill feeling seems to have been engendered at and before the caucus, which nominated both of these men for office; Aneals for supervisor, and Knox for assessor. Knox was elected, and Aneals defeated. William Aneals is the son of Asbury; Louis Stormer lived near the Aneals, and, at the time of the assault, was in William Aneals' employ. About a week after the election, the witness Altenheim testifies that Asbury Aneals said, when it was remarked that Mr. Knox was elected, that ‘he would never serve.’ The witness Gould, who claims to have been present, corroborates the statements of Altenheim, which are denied by Aneals. The defense was an alibi.

In respect of the evidence, of which the foregoing is an imperfect epitome, it must be said the jury heard the descriptions given of the assailants, particularly of the one alleged to have been Stormer, and had the...