People v. Feeley
| Decision Date | 15 October 1940 |
| Docket Number | No. 25655.,25655. |
| Citation | People v. Feeley, 374 Ill. 402, 29 N.E.2d 593 (Ill. 1940) |
| Parties | PEOPLE v. FEELEY et al. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Error to Circuit Court, St. Clair County; Maurice V. Joyce, Judge.
Frances Feeley and Peggie Nash were convicted for larceny of certain wearing apparel and other department store merchandise, and they bring error.
Affirmed.Lindauer & Lindauer and Sam S. Pessin, all of Belleville, for plaintiffs in error.
John E. Cassidy, Atty. Gen., Louis P. Zerweck, State's Atty., of Belleville, and A. B. Dennis, of Springfield, for defendant in error.
Frances Feeley and Peggie Nash were convicted by a jury in the circuit court of St. Clair county for larceny of certain wearing apparel and other department store merchandise valued at $28.16. They have sued out this writ of error.
On December 8, 1939, police officers of East St. Louis halted Edward Beckler for driving at an excessive rate of speed. Discovering a shoplifter's box together with a quantity of merchandise in the car they took Beckler to the station. He admitted that the car belonged to Peggie Nash, one of the plaintiffs in error, and that he was a brother of Frances Feeley, the other plaintiff in error. Beckler acknowledged in a statement given to the police that he drove the car for the plaintiffs in error while they were picking up various articles of merchandise in several department stores. Both of the girls admitted in a written statement given to the police that they had taken quantities of merchandise from four department stores in St. Louis, Missouri, and from three department stores in East St. Louis, Illinois.
When a search of the car was made by the police two shoplifter's boxes were found. They were described by the officers as a cardboard box, wrapped in wrapping paper and tied with a string, having a hole about three by five inches in one corner of the box. Examination of the articles in the car of plaintiffs in error disclosed twenty-four men's shirts, nine ties, sixty-one pairs of men's socks, eighteen ladies' slips, twelve pairs of ladies' gloves, eight house coats, twenty-nine men's handkerchiefs, nine boxes of rouge, five bottles of perfume, necklaces, cosmetic bags, etc.
George E. Jarrach, manager of the East St. Louis W. T. Grant & Company store, identified certain articles mentioned in the indictment as having come from the East St. Louis store.
Plaintiffs in error testified that the articles found in their car had been purchased in several stores in St. Louis,...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
People v. Wachowicz
...rule that the corpus delicti may be established by circumstantial evidence (22A C.J.S. Criminal Law § 604, p. 410; People v. Feeley, 374 Ill. 402, 29 N.E.2d 593). The attempted break was made in a tavern. The manager testified he had left the premises at 3:30 in the morning and had locked t......
-
People v. Sims
...as it may be used to connect the accused with the commission of the crime. People v. Jones, 382 Ill. 603, 48 N.E.2d 364; People v. Feeley, 374 Ill. 402, 29 N.E.2d 593. The credibility of the witnesses was a matter for the jury to determine, and we will not substitute our judgment for that o......
- Illinois Cent. R. Co. v. Vill. of South Pekin
-
People v. Rife
...as well as for the purpose of connecting the accused with the crime. People v. Gillespie, 344 Ill. 290, 176 N.E. 316;People v. Feeley, 374 Ill. 402, 29 N.E.2d 593. There is no invariable rule as to the quantum of proof necessary to establish the corpus delicti. Each case must depend, in a m......