People ex rel. Banks v. Farner
| Decision Date | 19 January 1968 |
| Docket Number | No. 40758,40758 |
| Citation | 39 Ill.2d 176,233 N.E.2d 360 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE ex rel. John Raymond BANKS, Appellant, v. Harold FARNER, Sheriff, Appellee. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
J. C. Mitchell and W. A. Armstrong, Marion, for appellant.
William G. Clark, Atty. Gen., Springfield, and K. T. Hubler, State's Atty., Marion (Fred G. Leach, Asst. Atty. Gen., of counsel), for appellee.
The circuit court of Williamson County quashed a writ of Habeas corpus, which had issued on the petition of relator John Raymond Banks. He was remanded to the custody of the sheriff for extradition to Alabama. The relator appeals, contending that the demand and supporting papers are insufficient.
The demand upon which the Governor of Illinois issued the rendition warrant says the relator stands charged with bigamy and two cases of forgery, second degree, committed within the county of Pickens and State of Alabama, 'as shown by certified copy of Indictment and allied papers.' Offered in evidence at the Habeas corpus hearing were the supporting papers presented to the Governor of Illinois. These showed that on July 25, 1962, the relator had been convicted of the designated crimes and sentenced to the penitentiary at Montgomery, from which he escaped on April 15, 1964, and that he has thereafter been at large and a fugitive from justice.
Asserting that the demand recites he stands charged 'by indictment,' the relator contends the supporting papers contradict it because they show that he stands charged of the crimes 'by virtue of a judgment of conviction.' It is argued that it was just this sort of contradiction which required the discharge of the relator in People ex rel. Ritholz v. Sain, 24 Ill.2d 168, 180 N.E.2d 464. In our opinion the facts here are distinguishable from those in Ritholz. There the demand recited only that relator stood charged of a crime by virtue of a complaint and warrant, but the supporting papers reflected that he stood charged of the crime by virtue of a judgment of conviction. In the present case the demand stated that relator was charged with crime as shown by the indictment 'and allied papers.' The demand in Ritholz, referring only to a complaint and warrant, was not consistent with the papers which showed a conviction, but the demand here, which referred to an indictment and allied papers, was in no way inconsistent with the papers showing the conviction. There may have been some doubt in the Ritholz case as to whether the crime referred to in the complaint was the same as that of which relator was convicted. There is no basis for such doubt here. The fact that the papers also showed conviction, sentence and escape does not contradict the statement that he stands charged with the designated crimes. Even after he has been convicted a person remains 'charged' with the crime, within the meaning of extradition statutes, so long as the judgment of conviction remains unsatisfied. People ex rel. Holmes v. Babb, 414 Ill. 490, 111 N.E.2d 316; People ex rel. Westbrook v. O'Neill, 378 Ill. 324, 38 N.E.2d 174.
Relator urges next that the indictments fail to sufficiently allege the times or places of the offenses, and fail to specify with particularity the nature of the crimes themselves. The contention must be rejected. It is well settled that the technical sufficiency of an indictment or information is not subject to consideration in a Habeas corpus proceeding. (People ex rel. Lacanski v. Backes, 19 Ill.2d 541, 169 N.E.2d 80; People ex rel. Downer v. O'Brien, 373 Ill. 383, 26 N.E.2d 488.) As this court pointed out in People ex rel. Flowers v. Gruenewald, 390 Ill....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Noe v. State
...therein. See Walden v. Mosley, 312 F.Supp. 855, 862 (N.D.Miss.1970) (conviction conclusive proof that charged); Illinois v. Farner, 39 Ill.2d 176, 233 N.E.2d 360, 361 (Ill.1968). The fact that appellant was involuntarily removed from the demanding state is immaterial. All that is required f......
-
People v. Meschino, 3-99-0725.
...The statute should be accorded liberal construction to accomplish the return of the fugitive summarily * * *." People v. Farner, 39 Ill.2d 176, 180, 233 N.E.2d 360, 362 (1968). This court must only consider whether the demand was in proper form and whether defendant was substantially and in......
-
People v. Crandall, 4-84-0257
...requirement that the indictment specify with particularity the nature of the crime or the factual basis. (People ex rel. Banks v. Farner (1968), 39 Ill.2d 176, 179, 233 N.E.2d 360, 361; Michigan v. Doran (1978), 439 U.S. 282, 289-90, 99 S.Ct. 530, 536, 58 L.Ed.2d 521, 528.) Crandall, howeve......
-
People ex rel. Bowman v. Woods, 42174
...7 Ill.2d 156, 130 N.E.2d 190.)' People ex rel. Levin v. Ogilvie, 36 Ill.2d 566, 567, 224 N.E.2d 247; Cf. People ex rel. Banks v. Farner, 39 Ill.2d 176, 180, 233 N.E.2d 360. However, because there was an inordinate delay not attributable to the petitioner, closer scrutiny is In this case the......