People v. Baskin

• Decision Date: 21 June 1912
• Parties: PEOPLE v. BASKIN.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

254 Ill. 509

98 N.E. 957

PEOPLE

v.BASKIN.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

June 21, 1912.

Error to Criminal Court, Cook County; Martin M. Gridley, Judge.

Adolph Baskin was convicted of receiving stolen property, and he brings error. Affirmed.James T. Brady (Edwin J. Raber, of counsel), for plaintiff in error.

W. H. Stead, Atty. Gen., John E. W. Wayman, State's Atty., and Fred H. Hand (Jeremiah Sullivan, of counsel), for the People.

CARTER, J.

Plaintiff in error was convicted in the criminal court of Cook county of receiving stolen property and sentenced to an indeterminate period in the penitentiary. Richard McLaughlin,jointly indicted with plaintiff in error, was found not guilty by the jury.

On April 22, 1911, the place of business of the Quinn Supply Company, dealers in plumbers' supplies in Chicago, was entered and a watch and chain, a ring, two revolvers, about $60 in money, and a quantity of plumbers' supplies valued at several hundred dollars were taken. Frank Platt, who was at the time of this trial serving a term in the penitentiary for highway robbery, testified for the state that on Saturday night, April 22, 1911, he, with John Kaczor, assisted a part of the time by James Buckley, an expressman, went to the Quinn Company's place of business and took this property, leaving a part of it at Buckley's place, on Wells street, in Chicago, and the plumbers' supplies at Baskin's junk yard, which they reached between 6 and 7 the following morning; that one McLaughlin, an employé of Baskin, in charge of the place, telephoned to his employer; that Baskin came shortly thereafter to the store; that after some conversation he asked Platt where he got the brass, and the latter told him the facts; that Baskin said he did not know whether or not, if he bought it, he could sell it, but after conferring with a man with spectacles whom Platt did not know, said he would take it, weighed it, and paid him $180, or 10 cents a pound. According to Platt's story, he made two trips to Quinn's store—one with Kaczor alone, and the other with Kaczor and Buckley, with Buckley's wagon—and the $180 was divided equally between himself, Kaczor, and Buckley and the other property between himself and Kaczor. Buckley did not testify. Kaczor testified substantially the same as Platt as to the delivery and sale of the plumber's supplies to Baskin, but stated that he only made one trip to Quinn's place of business that night—that being with Platt and Buckley—and that he (Kaczor) only received $3 from the sale of the brass. Baskin testified denying that he had purchased the plumbing supplies or any other junk from Platt or Kaczor or that he was at his place of business at all on the Sunday morning in question. His testimony on the latter point was corroborated by a witness who lived in the same flat building and testified that she saw him at his home that morning. He stated that his employé, McLaughlin, on May 5, 1911, telephoned him that some men wanted to sell a load of brass and asked if he should let them leave it, and that he replied that he did not want to buy from people he did not know and to send them away; that he afterwards learned from one Mansfield, who dealt in junk, that on May 5th he had bought of Platt some old brass. McLaughlin, who kept the books and acted as watchman for Baskin, testified that on Friday morning, May 5th, Platt, Kaczor, Buckley, and one Cervenski called at Baskin's place of business with a load of brass, and he told them they would have to see the boss; that he then telephoned to Baskin about the material being there and was told that he did not want to purchase from men he did not know; that Platt, Kaczor, and the others drove away in an ill humor, cursing and swearing at Baskin. He also testified that none of these men came to Baskin's place of business on April 23d. Quinn, the owner of the stolen property, swore that the brass was worth about $1,300. When stolen it was largely in the form of new valves, and according to Platt and Kaczor the wheels on these were broken off with a sledge at the junk yard. A witness for Baskin testified that for melting and refining purposes material of the character in question was not worth at that time more than 7 1/2 cents a pound. Four witnesses testified as to former good character of Baskin.

[1] The chief contention of the plaintiff in error is that the evidence does not justify a conviction; there being no other testimony than that of Platt and Kaczor that the brass was ever in plaintiff in error's possession. It is admitted by counsel that a judgment of conviction for a crime may properly be based upon the uncorroborated evidence of an accomplice (Rider v. People, 110 Ill. 11;Gray v. People, 26 Ill. 344;Loehr v. People, 132 Ill. 504, 24 N. E. 68); but it is contended that such evidence, under all authorities, is subject to grave suspicion...