People v. Clark, No. 36835

CourtSupreme Court of Illinois
Writing for the CourtHOUSE
PartiesThe PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, v. James CLARK, Plaintiff in Error.
Decision Date27 September 1963
Docket NumberNo. 36835

Page 851

192 N.E.2d 851
28 Ill.2d 423
The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error,
v.
James CLARK, Plaintiff in Error.
No. 36835.
Supreme Court of Illinois.
Sept. 27, 1963.

Page 852

Thomas A. Loose, Peoria, for plaintiff in error.

[28 Ill.2d 424] William G. Clark, Atty. Gen., Springfield, and James V. Cunningham, State's Atty., Peoria (Fred G. Leach and E. Michael O'Brien, Asst. Attys. Gen., and Jay H. Janssen, Asst. State's Atty., of counsel), for defendant in error.

HOUSE, Justice.

James Clark was found guilty of the crime of robbery by a jury in the circuit court of Peoria County and sentenced to the penitentiary for a term of 4 to 8 years. The only question raised on this writ of error is whether the identity of defendant as the perpetrator of the crime was proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

Between 8:00 P. M. and 9:00 P. M. on November 18, 1960, Vaneeda Fleener was returning home from the grocery store when her car ran out of gasoline near the intersection of Bradley and Windom streets in Peoria. She walked to a service station, purchased a gallon of gasoline, and on her return to her automobile she was approached by two men. The man on her right grabbed her, pushed her back and started hitting her in the ribs with his fist. The man on her left tore her purse loose from her arm and the two men fled.

Mrs. Fleener testified that she observed the man who pulled her purse from her arm but not the man who struck her. She said the area was well illuminated by street lights at the intersection and from a string of lights at a used-car lot near there. The man on her left was only one to two feet away from her and she observed him for several minutes while he tugged and jerked at her purse before breaking it loose from her arm.

On December 6 she was called to the police station to view some suspects. While waiting at the station she saw three or four men moving articles from one room to another. She recognized one of these men as the man who [28 Ill.2d 425] took her purse. She then went into the line-up room and identified the defendant from the group. She later learned that the articles being moved by the men were stolen articles. She again positively identified defendant at the trial.

The defendant did not testify. His girl friend, a junior in high school, testified that defendant was at her home during the time the robbery occurred. The girl friend's sister, also a junior in high school, corroborated the testimony of her...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 practice notes
  • United States v. Wade, No. 334
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • June 12, 1967
    ...304 Ill. 494, 136 N.E. 711 (1922); Barrett v. State, 190 Tenn. 366, 229 S.W.2d 516, 18 A.L.R.2d 789 (1950). 22. See People v. Clark, 28 Ill.2d 423, 192 N.E.2d 851 (1963); Gillespie v. State, 355 P.2d 451, 454 (Okl.Cr.1960). 23. See People v. Parham, 60 Cal.2d 378, 33 Cal.Rptr. 497, 384 P.2d......
  • United States v. Denno, No. 307
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
    • January 31, 1966
    ...84 S. Ct. 1353, 12 L.Ed.2d 308 (1964), (defendant forced to try on hat and coat which did not fit others in line-up); People v. Clark, 28 Ill.2d 423, 192 N.E.2d 851 (1963), (witness saw one of suspects in police station before line-up); People v. Boney, 28 Ill.2d 505, 192 N.E.2d 920 (1963),......
  • People v. Bernette, No. 37406
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • January 22, 1964
    ...factor goes only to the weight and [30 Ill.2d 368] credibility of Garrett's testimony, a function committed to the jury (People v. Clark, 28 Ill.2d 423, 192 N.E.2d 851), and we note here the jury was expressly instructed that the testimony of the witness was to be received with caution. Nei......
  • People v. Mitchell, Gen. No. 51765
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • October 24, 1968
    ...of the identification of the defendant is always a question for the jury and will not lightly be set aside on appeal. People v. Clark, 28 Ill.2d 423, 192 N.E.2d 851. We do not believe that the identification of the defendant was in any way unsatisfactory, nor can we say that the testimony o......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
8 cases
  • United States v. Wade, No. 334
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • June 12, 1967
    ...304 Ill. 494, 136 N.E. 711 (1922); Barrett v. State, 190 Tenn. 366, 229 S.W.2d 516, 18 A.L.R.2d 789 (1950). 22. See People v. Clark, 28 Ill.2d 423, 192 N.E.2d 851 (1963); Gillespie v. State, 355 P.2d 451, 454 (Okl.Cr.1960). 23. See People v. Parham, 60 Cal.2d 378, 33 Cal.Rptr. 497, 384 P.2d......
  • United States v. Denno, No. 307
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
    • January 31, 1966
    ...84 S. Ct. 1353, 12 L.Ed.2d 308 (1964), (defendant forced to try on hat and coat which did not fit others in line-up); People v. Clark, 28 Ill.2d 423, 192 N.E.2d 851 (1963), (witness saw one of suspects in police station before line-up); People v. Boney, 28 Ill.2d 505, 192 N.E.2d 920 (1963),......
  • People v. Bernette, No. 37406
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • January 22, 1964
    ...factor goes only to the weight and [30 Ill.2d 368] credibility of Garrett's testimony, a function committed to the jury (People v. Clark, 28 Ill.2d 423, 192 N.E.2d 851), and we note here the jury was expressly instructed that the testimony of the witness was to be received with caution. Nei......
  • People v. Mitchell, Gen. No. 51765
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • October 24, 1968
    ...of the identification of the defendant is always a question for the jury and will not lightly be set aside on appeal. People v. Clark, 28 Ill.2d 423, 192 N.E.2d 851. We do not believe that the identification of the defendant was in any way unsatisfactory, nor can we say that the testimony o......
  • 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