People v. Erickson
| Decision Date | 03 April 1969 |
| Docket Number | Gen. No. 68--124 |
| Citation | 108 Ill.App.2d 142,246 N.E.2d 457 |
| Parties | PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Ralph ERICKSON, Defendant-Appellee. |
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
William V. Hopf, State's Atty., J. Michael Fitzsimmons, Jr., Asst. State's Atty., Wheaton, for appellant.
Anthony F. Mannina, Marco & Mannina, Downers Grove, for appellee.
The State brings this appeal claiming that the magistrate's order of April 16, 1968, quashing the complaint and his order of June 18, 1968, refusing to vacate such order was in error.
The defendant, Ralph Erickson, was charged with driving a vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor in violation of Section 47 of the Uniform Act Regulating Traffic on Highways (Ill.Rev.Stat.1967, Ch. 95 1/2, Sec. 144(a)). The occurrence took place in a privately owned parking lot. The same Act also provides in Section 20 as follows:
'Provisions of act refer to vehicles upon the highways--Exceptions. The provisions of this Act relating to the operation of vehicles refer exclusively to the operation of vehicles upon highways except:
1. Where a different place is specifically referred to in a given section.
2. The provisions of Articles IV and V shall apply upon highways and elsewhere throughout the State.'
Article V referred to in the above quoted section includes the offense charged against the defendant.
The single issue for decision is: Is the offense charged applicable to the defendant when he is upon private property (that is, a shopping center parking lot) as distinguished from public highways and 'elsewhere throughout the State'? We answer in the affirmative.
While this is a case of first impression in Illinois, the question is not foreign to other jurisdictions. An almost identical situation occurred in New Jersey as reported in the case of State v. Sisti, 62 N.J.Super. 84, 162 A.2d 297 (1960). In that case, as in the instant case, the statute violated did not contain verbiage which would restrict itself to the offense occurring 'on highways'. Instead, it simply provided that a person who operates a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor would be subject to a penalty. As in the case before us, the defendant sought to establish and the State to negate, that the act under scrutiny was meant to apply only if the occurrence took place upon a highway. In response the Appellate Court of New Jersey, at 162 A.2d 298, stated:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Budden, 50583
...of this type apply to private property. State v. Hollobaugh, 297 A.2d 395 (Del.Super.1972) (Delaware); People v. Erickson, 108 Ill.App.2d 142, 246 N.E.2d 457 (1969) (Illinois); Seattle v. Wright, 72 Wash.2d 556, 433 P.2d 906 (1967) (Washington); State v. Valeu, 257 Iowa 867, 134 N.W.2d 911 ......
-
People v. Guynn, 75--3
...95 1/2, § 11--201). The designation 'elsewhere' was construed to include privately-owned parking lots in People v. Erickson (2nd Dist., 1969), 108 Ill.App.2d 142, 145, 246 N.E.2d 457. The court distinguished there between private areas devoted to public uses or 'semi-public' areas such as p......
-
People v. Montelongo
...568, 5 Ill.Dec. 936, 362 N.E.2d 407, citing People v. Guynn (1975), 33 Ill.App.3d 736, 338 N.E.2d 239; see also People v. Erickson (1969), 108 Ill.App.2d 142, 246 N.E.2d 457. Notwithstanding our recognition of the fact that the implied consent statute is to be liberally construed to effectu......
-
City of Highland Park v. Block
...clearly applicable throughout the entire state of Illinois. This issue was considered, in part, by this court in People v. Erickson (1969), 108 Ill.App.2d 142, 246 N.E.2d 457, in which we held that a defendant could be convicted for driving while intoxicated upon a privately owned parking l......