Baits v. People

Decision Date20 January 1888
Citation16 N.E. 483,123 Ill. 428
PartiesBAITS v. PEOPLE.
CourtIllinois Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Error to the circuit court, Fayette county; J. J. PHILLIPS, Judge.

F. M. Guinn, for plaintiff in error.

J. M. Albert, for defendant in error.

CRAIG, J.

This was an indictment under paragraphs 73, 74, § 46, Crim. Code, (Starr & C. St. 769.) The punishment provided for a violation of paragraph 73 is imprisonment in the penitentiary not exceeding three years, or a fine not exceeding $1,000. Under paragraph 74 the punishment provided when a person is convicted is a fine of not less than $100, and not more than $5,000, and imprisonment either in the penitentiary or county jail for a period not exceeding two years. Sections 5, 6, c. 38, Crim. Code, (Starr & C. St. 829,) provide: ‘A felony is an offense punishable with death or by imprisonment in the penitentiary.’ ‘Every other offense is a misdemeanor.’ This statute was before us in Lamkin v. People, 94 Ill. 501, and we there held that when the offense may be punished by imprisonment in the penitentiary or by fine only, in the discretion of the court or jury, it is only a misdemeanor. Here the plaintiff in error sued out the writ of error directly from this court to the circuit court, and the defendant having been convicted of a misdemeanor, the question is raised whether this court has jurisdiction. Section 88 of the practice act is conclusive of the question. That act declares appeals from and writs of error to circuit courts, the superior court of Cook county, the criminal court of Cook county, county courts and city courts, in all criminal cases below the grade of felony, shall be taken directly to the appellate court. The offense charged in the indictment, of which the defendant was convicted,being a misdemeanor, he could not sue but a writ of error in this court, but, under the plain reading of the statute, he was bound to go to the appellate court. The writ of error will be dismissed. Leave will be given plaintiff in error to withdraw record, abstracts, and briefs, to be used in appellate court, if he desires.

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 cases
  • People v. Novotny
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • November 22, 1968
    ...penalty of imprisonment other than in the penitentiary rendered the offense a misdemeanor. (Lamkin v. People, 94 Ill. 501; Baits v. People, 123 Ill. 428, 16 N.E. 483; People v. Stavrakas, 335 Ill. 570, 582, 167 N.E. 852.) Since no substantial difference exists between the definition of 'fel......
  • Brown v. State
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • February 12, 1970
    ...or by a fine only, in the discretion of the court or jury, it is a misdemeanor. Lamkin v. People, 94 Ill. 501; Baits v. People, 123 Ill. 428, 16 N.E. 483.' (Emphasis added.) Adams therefore aligned itself with the Illinois courts in construing offenses carrying alternative punishments to be......
  • People v. Hise
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • August 3, 1971
    ...The People v. Novotny, 41 Ill.2d 401, 244 N.E.2d 182, and between Lamkin and Novotny, supra, the rule was reiterated in Baits v. The People, 123 Ill. 428, 16 N.E. 483; The People v. Stavrakas, 335 Ill. 570, 167 N.E. 852; The People v. Bain, 359 Ill. 455, 195 N.E. 42; The People v. O'Connor,......
  • Herman v. People
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • October 31, 1889
    ...in the penitentiary, or fine, or both, is that they are misdemeanors and not felonies. Lamkin v. People, 94 Ill. 501;Baits v. People, 123 Ill. 428, 16 N. E. Rep. 483. The fourth and fifth counts are predicated upon section 1 of the Criminal Code, (Rev. St. c. 38, § 1.) The one charges an en......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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