People v. Brown

Decision Date23 January 1946
Docket NumberNo. 29269.,29269.
Citation64 N.E.2d 739,392 Ill. 519
PartiesPEOPLE v. BROWN.
CourtIllinois Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Error to Criminal Court, Cook County; Frank M. Padden, Judge.

William Brown was convicted of manslaughter, and he brings error.

Affirmed.

Louis L. Gould and Stephen Lee, both of Chicago, for plaintiff in error.

George F. Barrett, Atty. Gen., and William J. Tuohy, State's Atty., of Chicago (Edward E. Wilson, John T. Gallagher, and Melvin T. Rembe, all of Chicago, of counsel), for the People.

GUNN, Justice.

Plaintiff in error, William Brown, seeks reversal of a conviction of manslaughter on May 25, 1945, in the criminal court of Cook county. He was indicted for manslaughter and waived a jury trial. The judgment of the court sentenced him to a minimum of ten, and a maximum of fourteen, years in the penitentiary.

April 1, 1945, the defendant and James Moorehouse, the deceased, after playing pool for some time in a room located at No. 1433 West Roosevelt road, adjourned to the alley in the rear of the building to shoot dice. A quarrel occurred almost immediately, in which the defendant stabbed the deceased with a knife, from which he died within a short time.

The facts are confused. Upon the part of the People the evidence tended to prove that during an argument about paying the defendant a dollar he claimed to have won from the deceased, he took a knife from his pocket and struck at the deceased several times. He and the deceased had each other by the collar, and while so in contact the defendant had his knife in his hand, and deceased requested a witness to call the police, for he did not want to hurt the defendant. The defendant admits the argument and the fight, but says when the deceased grabbed him by the collar he had got his knife to scare him; that they then separated and the deceased got a broken bottle, and during an attempt to assault the defendant with the same the latter again got out his knife and cut or stabbed the deceased. In his testimony defendant says he seized the hand holding the bottle, got out his knife, cut him three times, and then ran up the alley. He also testified that the first time he got the knife from his pocket the deceased had nothing in his hands. After death it was discovered the latter had been stabbed six times. Both were young men, defendant weighing 165 pounds, and deceased 145 pounds. The defendant claims self-defense. The evidence discloses the defendant drew a knife during the first argument, when the deceased was unarmed. Further, he struck the deceased three times after the latter had dropped the bottle. There is evidence the deceased was cut or stabbed in the first encounter, when he was not armed.

Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice, express or implied, and without any mixture of deliberation whatever. It must be voluntary, upon a sudden heat of passion, caused by a provocation apparently sufficient to make the passion irresistible, or involuntary in the commission of an unlawful act without due caution or circumspection. Ill.Rev.Stat.1945, chap. 38, par. 361; People v. Bissett, 246 Ill. 516, 92 N.E. 949.

People v. Pursley, 302 Ill. 62, 134 N.E. 128, presents facts somewhat similar to those in this case. We there held that where one engaged in a fist fight is the aggressor, and the other unexpectedly attacks with a deadly weapon, and the aggressor kills while resisting the deadly assault, his offense is manslaughter, but where one attempt was made by the deceased to strike the defendant with his fist, it would not be sufficient to justify the use of a deadly weapon, or reduce the offense to manslaughter.

The facts as related in this case by the People's witnesses show no justification for the defendant using a knife when the deceased was using only his hands or fists and the defendant was in no other apparent danger than that which might be suffered in an ordinary fist fight, and where the parties were apparently of about the same size and strength. The defendant admits he used a knife upon the deceased before the latter had procured the broken bottle. All of the witnesses agree that the defendant struck the deceased five or six times with a knife. Some of those strokes were before the deceased had anything in his hands, as indicated by the six wounds found upon his body.

Where a case is tried without a jury the law has committed to the trial court the determination of the credibility of the witnesses and the weight to be accorded to their testimony. People v. Sain, 384 Ill. 394, 51 N.E.2d 557. The evidence adduced in the case was amply to justify a refusal of a directed verdict and to establish that the defendant was guilty of manslaughter beyond a reasonable...

To continue reading

Request your trial
22 cases
  • People v. Alejos
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • October 4, 1983
    ...and committed without time for proper reflection. (See People v. Sudduth (1958), 14 Ill.2d 605, 607, 153 N.E.2d 557; People v. Brown (1946), 392 Ill. 519, 521, 64 N.E.2d 739; Moore v. People (1893), 146 Ill. 600, 602, 35 N.E. 166; see generally Clark & Marshall, Law of Crimes sec. 10.11 (6t......
  • People v. Coolidge
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • February 1, 1963
    ...of defendant were so serious that probation would not be justified (Cf. People v. Sudduth, 14 Ill.2d 605, 153 N.E.2d 557; People v. Brown, 392 Ill. 519, 64 N.E.2d 739.) And while it would be enough to further point out that the discretion of the trial court in granting or refusing probation......
  • People v. Evrard
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • November 24, 1965
    ...67 N.E.2d 197; People v. Wheeler, 349 Ill. 230-234, 181 N.E. 623; People v. Miller, 317 Ill. 33, 38, 39, 147 N.E. 396; People v. Brown, 392 Ill. 519, 523, 64 N.E.2d 739; People v. Bonheim, 307 Ill. 316, 321, 138 N.E. 627; and People v. Pelikan, 6 Ill.2d 275, 277, 128 N.E.2d In People v. Fic......
  • People v. Drakeford
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • November 21, 1990
    ...97 Ill.2d at 507, 74 Ill.Dec. 18, 455 N.E.2d 48; see People v. Sudduth (1958), 14 Ill.2d 605, 153 N.E.2d 557; People v. Brown (1946), 392 Ill. 519, 521, 64 N.E.2d 739; Moore v. People (1893), 146 Ill. 600, 602, 35 N.E. 166; see generally Clark & Marshall, Law of Crimes § 10.11 (Wingersky 6t......
  • 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