Long v. Israel
Decision Date | 09 December 1977 |
Docket Number | No. 76-257,76-257 |
Citation | 13 Ill.Dec. 781,56 Ill.App.3d 14,371 N.E.2d 873 |
Parties | , 13 Ill.Dec. 781 James LONG, Petitioner-Appellant, v. T. R. ISRAEL et al., Respondents-Appellees. |
Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
Richard J. Habiger, Dennis S. Waks, Prison Legal Aid, Carbondale, for petitioner-appellant.
Bruce D. Irish, Sp. State's Atty., Jefferson County, Mount Vernon, for respondents-appellees.
This is an appeal by petitioner, James Long, from the denial of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus by the circuit court of Jefferson County.
Petitioner had originally been charged in the circuit court of Jefferson County with the offense of burglary. On July 12, 1974, following negotiations petitioner pleaded guilty to one count of the charged offense and was sentenced to four years probation. On August 5, 1974, a petition to revoke probation was filed and on August 20, 1974, pursuant to negotiations, petitioner admitted the allegations in the petition to revoke probation in return for a State recommended sentence of one year to one year and one day which sentence was imposed by the court as recommended. Subsequently, having completed his term of imprisonment with "good time" credit, petitioner was released on February 27, 1975, on parole for a mandatory parole term of three years. While on parole, during June, 1975, petitioner was convicted of an unrelated offense and consequently, following a hearing, petitioner's parole was revoked on August 12, 1975. Thereafter, petitioner filed the instant petition for a writ of habeas corpus seeking release from incarceration.
Petitioner's claim for relief is based on the trial court's failure to admonish him of the mandatory parole term immediately prior to his original guilty plea to the underlying offense and the court's failure to similarly admonish him at the time he admitted the allegations in the petition to revoke his probation. While petitioner concedes that People v. Wills, 61 Ill.2d 105, 330 N.E.2d 505, cert. denied, 423 U.S. 999, 96 S.Ct. 430, 46 L.Ed.2d 374, requiring such an admonishment, is inapplicable to the instant case which antedated Wills, petitioner contends on appeal the denial of certain constitutional rights of petitioner by the imposition of a mandatory parole term without a prior admonition thereof. The State responds inter alia by arguing that at an arraignment on April 9, 1974, on the original charge, petitioner was in fact admonished of the mandatory parole term and that such an admonishment was sufficient to carry over and be effective in all the subsequent proceedings.
We find that we need not and should not consider what merit, if any, exists to the claimed denial of petitioner's constitutional rights. The instant case is not before us on...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
United States ex rel. O'Connor v. MacDonald
...say that Illinois courts display an unwillingness to make state remedies available to prisoners. See, e. g., Long v. Israel, 56 Ill.App.3d 14, 13 Ill.Dec. 781, 371 N.E.2d 873 (1977). Whether common law certiorari, a well known Illinois procedure, see Goodfriend v. Board of Appeals of Cook C......
-
US EX REL. WELLS v. STATEVILLE CORREC. CENTER
...test, it seems quite clear that state habeas corpus is a futile remedy to one in petitioner's situation. See Long v. Israel, 56 Ill.App.3d 14, 13 Ill.Dec. 781, 371 N.E.2d 873 (1978); People ex rel. Jenkins v. Department of Corrections, 32 Ill.App.3d 147, 336 N.E.2d 385 (1975). As to post-co......
-
People v. Reese
... ... (Hughes v. Kiley (1977), 67 Ill.2d 261, 10 Ill.Dec. 247, 367 N.E.2d 700; Long v. Israel (1977), 56 Ill.App.3d 14, 13 Ill.Dec. 781, 371 N.E.2d 873.) The writ is authorized only where the judgment is void because the trial court ... ...
-
People ex rel. Swiderski v. Brierton
...entitles the prisoner to release. Hughes v. Kiley (1977), 67 Ill.2d 261, 10 Ill.Dec. 247, 367 N.E.2d 700; Long v. Israel (1977), 56 Ill.App.3d 14, 13 Ill.Dec. 781, 371 N.E.2d 873. In People v. Wills (1975), 61 Ill.2d 105, 330 N.E.2d 505, our supreme court held that compliance with Rule 402(......