People ex rel. James v. Lynch
| Decision Date | 20 March 1959 |
| Docket Number | No. 35016,35016 |
| Citation | 16 Ill.2d 380,158 N.E.2d 60 |
| Parties | PEOPLE ex rel. Eugene C. JAMES, Appellant, v. Stanley A. LYNCH et al., Appellees. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
Michael H. Brodkin and Jason Ernest Bellows, Chicago, for appellant. Latham Castle, Atty. Gen., and William L. Guild, State's Atty., Wheaton (Fred G. Leach, Decatur, William H. South, Carmi, and William J. Bauer, Wheaton, of counsel), for appellees.
Eugene C. James, hereinafter referred to as the relator, filed his petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the circuit court of DuPage County to test the validity of his extradition to the State of New Jersey. A return to the writ was filed alleging the Governor's warrant, and the petition was allowed to stand as a traverse to the return. A hearing was had upon these pleadings at the conclusion of which the writ was ordered quashed and the relator ordered remanded to the custody of the respondents for delivery to the messenger of the State of New Jersey. The relator seeks a review here of his contentions that he was not in the demanding State on the various dates alleged in the indictment and that he was not the same person named in the various counts of the indictment. Section 10 of the Uniform Criminal Extradition Act authorizes our jurisdiction to consider this appeal. Ill.Rev.Stat.1957, chap. 60, par. 27.
The indictment charges a conspiracy between Louis B. Saperstein and Eugene C. James, wherein funds of the Laundry Workers International Union were embezzled while James was the acting secretary-treasurer of said union and also seventh vice-president. There are 24 counts in the indictment, each charging misappropriations of union funds in large amounts, some suggesting, $500,000, $600,000 and $700,000. It was alleged that the acts were committed in the State of New Jersey, beginning on or about March 31, 1950, and continuing to about May 6, 1954. The overt acts were alleged in the various counts to have been committed on or about March 31, 1950; August 14, 1950; between February 1, 1951, and March 26, 1954; between October 17, 1952, and January 18, 1954; between September 14, 1951, and Auguest 27, 1953; and between September 26, 1951, and May 6, 1954; September 24, 1952; October 3, 1952; November 7, 1952; December 9, 1952; December 15, 1952; January 27, 1953; March 2, 1953; March 20, 1953; April 10, 1953; April 14, 1953; April 28, 1953; June 10, 1953; July 7, 1953; August 12, 1953; August 31, 1953; September 28, 1953; October 14, 1953; October 15, 1953; November 6, 1953; December 7, 1953; December 30, 1953; January 29, 1954; February 8, 1954, and February 10, 1954.
The relator's direct testimony was brief. He simply stated that he was not in New Jersey on March 31, 1950, or on September 24, 1952 and that he was not the same person as the Eugene C. James named in the indictment.
On cross-examination, relator was questioned about respondent's exhibit 2 which consisted of various papers submitted by the Governor of New Jersey in requesting the warrant from the Governor of Illinois. As a part of this exhibit there was an affidavit of Winfield S. Chasmar to which was attached a photograph of a group of people allegedly attending a wedding reception given for the daughter of Louis B. Saperstein in Newark, New Jersey, in the latter part of December, 1952. Chasmar stated that he was president of the local union No. 284 of the Laundry Workers International Union from 1938 to 1957; that he had known Eugene C. James as an officer of the union for 15 years. Relator admitted knowing him for 20 years. Also a part of exhibit 2 is a photostatic copy of a certificate of marriage of Stanley B. Amsterdam and Judith F. Saperstein, duly certified by the State Registrar, accompanied by a certificate of his authority by the Secretary of State of New Jersey. According to the certificate the marriage was performed on December 27, 1952.
The relator admitted his presence when the group picture was taken but could not remember the date or the circumstances under which it was taken. He recognized Louis B. Saperstein, his codefendant, also Samuel J. Byers who was also mentioned in the indictment as one of the agents of the involved union. The relator's attitude, when being questioned about his alleged presence in the State of New Jersey during the latter part of December, 1952, is best reflected in the questions and answers on this subject, quoting from the record:
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Newman v. Elrod, 78-789
...of identity, and plaintiff would then have to show that he is not the person whose extradition is demanded (People ex rel. James v. Lynch (1959), 16 Ill.2d 380, 158 N.E.2d 60, Cert. denied (1959), 361 U.S. 864, 80 S.Ct. 123, 4 L.Ed.2d 104; Nelson v. People (1973), 11 Ill.App.3d 1092, 297 N.......
-
Josey v. Galloway
...accused on habeas corpus, unless the exact date or dates constitute a material element of the offense charged. See, People v. Lynch, 16 Ill.2d 380, 158 N.E.2d 60 (1959); Campbell v. Shapp, 385 F.Supp. 305 (E.D.Pa.1974); Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, ex rel. Kelly v. Aytch, 254 Pa.Super. 28,......
-
Hithe v. Nelson
...447, 299 S.W.2d 701; Ex parte Kaufman, 168 Tex.Cr.R. 55, 323 S.W.2d 48; Charlie Wong v. Esola, 9 Cir., 6 F.2d 828; People ex rel. James v. Lynch, 16 Ill.2d 380, 158 N.E.2d 60; Bayless v. United States, 9 Cir., 381 F.2d 67; Chew v. Boyd, 9 Cir., 309 F.2d The petitioner cites Commonwealth ex ......
-
Salvail v. Sharkey
...the identity of the accused. Hithe v. Nelson, Colo., 471 P.2d 596; Ex parte Freeman, 80 Ariz, 21, 291 P.2d 795; People ex rel. James v. Lynch, 16 Ill.2d 380, 158 N.E.2d 60; see also 93 A.L.R.2d § 11 at Here, there has been no showing that the accused's name is identical with that of the per......