People v. Gold

Decision Date14 June 1935
Docket NumberNo. 22950.,22950.
Citation361 Ill. 23,196 N.E. 729
PartiesPEOPLE v. GOLD.
CourtIllinois Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Error to Criminal Court, Cook County; John C. Lewe, Judge.

Joseph Gold was convicted of larceny of a sewing machine of the value of $120, and he brings error.

Reversed and remanded.

Ode L. Rankin, of Chicago, for plaintiff in error.

Otto Kerner, Atty. Gen., Thomas J. Courtney, State's Atty. of Chicago, and J. J. Neiger, of Springfield (Edward E. Wilson, Henry E. Seyfarth, and John T. Gallagher, all of Chicago, of counsel), for the People.

JONES, Justice.

Joseph Gold was convicted in the criminal court of Cook county of the larceny of a sewing machine of the value of $120 belonging to the Singer Sewing Machine Company. The trial was by jury and the cause is here on writ of error.

The ground relied upon for reversal is that the defense of alibi and good character outweighed the testimony of the people identifying defendant as the thief.

Harry Levitus, manager of a branch office of the Singer Sewing Machine Company in the west part of Chicago, testified that about 11:15 o'clock a. m. on Saturday, February 3, 1934, he parked his car across the street from another branch of the company on Marion street, in Oak Park, and went across to the office to get the pay roll for his men. The Oak Park branch is on the east side of the street and directly across from an alley running west from Marion street to Harlem avenue. The store is on the first floor and has a plate glass front. Marion street is about [361 Ill. 25]55 feet wide. South of the alley, and just off the sidewalk, is an incline leading to an elevator in the rear of the Fair store. Levitus parked his car on the incline. It was headed west, with the rear end in front of the Singer Sewing Machine Company office. The car was equipped with a trunk on the rear for carrying a sewing machine. One was in it at this time. About fifteen minutes after Levitus entered the office, he and Oscar B. Lipsitz, an employee of the credit department, were in the front of the store and saw a man taking the sewing machine out of the trunk on the back of the car. They ran out of the store and across the street in an effort to intercept the thief. Before they could reach him, the man placed the machine in the rumble seat of a brown coupé. The car was headed west in the alley and was driven by another party. The thief jumped on the right-hand running board of the car and they drove west through the alley, turned north on Harlem avenue, and escaped. Meanwhile the thief got into the car from the running-board.

Levitus testified that while he was in pursuit he shouted, ‘Stop Thief!’ when he was about 25 feet away from the man who was taking the machine from the automobile; that the man glanced around and Levitus saw his eyes, nose, and mouth; that the pursuit was momentarily interfered with by an automobile which was proceeding south on Marion street; that he could not see the thief's car behind a small building until he got within 10 feet of the man as he was putting the machine in the rumble seat; that the man had on a fedora hat and a tan overcoat, was 5 feet 6 or 7 inches tall, weighed from 155 to 160 pounds, and had a pugilistic nose and a sandy complexion; that he did not notice his ears nor remember the color of the hat; and that defendant was the man who took the machine.

Lipsitz testified he looked through the window of the company office and saw a man taking the machine out of the trunk on the Levitus car across the street and got a good look at him. The man had on a dark felt hat and a dark overcoat that looked brown. It was not black. He had a pugilistic nose and deformed features, with ears close to the head. He was about 5 feet 7 1/2 inches tall, weighed about 165 pounds, and was 32 or 33 years of age. The witness ran across the street behind Levitus and got within 30 feet of the thief. He testified the machine was stolen about 11:30 o'clock a. m. and that defendant was the man who took it.

The testimony of Levitus and Lipsitz is the only testimony tending to connect defendant with the crime. It was stipulated that his gae is 26 years.

Robert E. Dunne, an attorney at law associated with the attorney who defended Gold in the trial court, testified that as an investigator he interviewed Lipsitz in September, 1934; that he asked Lipsitz what left an impression of the man on his mind, and Lipsitz told him the man be saw taking the machine had cauliflower ears and a flat nose; that these features impressed him because he had been connected with the pugilistic game; that at the time of the occurrence he was outside the door with two other employees going to lunch; and that the man he saw taking the machine wore a cap and a brown overcoat. In rebuttal, Lipsitz testified that Dunne did not ask him what impressed him as to the identity of defendant, and he did not say that defendant had cauliflower ears and a pug nose, nor that the man who took the machine wore a cap.

Alexander Inglis, a police officer of Oak Park, testified that on the day of the theft Levitus told him the man who took the machine weighed about 170 pounds, wore a dark overcoat with a fur collar, and a brown hat; that the car into which the machine was put had an Antioch, Ill., sticker on the windshield. A typewritten police report made by Inglis on the day of the occurrence after his interview with Levitus, showing the facts to which he testified, was admitted in evidence without objection. Levitus denied telling him that the man had on a dark overcoat with a fur collar and denied saying that the thief's car had an Antioch sticker on the windshield. He testified that he told him the man had on a tan overcoat.

Defendant resided at 1503 South Millard avenue, in Chicago, with his grandmother, his aunt, and uncle. He last worked as a painter. He denied categorically that he was near the vicinity of the theft, denied taking any machine out of a car, placing it in another car, and getting into the latter car, and denied having anything to do with or knowledge of the theft. He testified that on the morning of February 3 he went over to his mother's house, at 1516 South Ridgway avenue, and found his mother, his sister (Stella Harris), and her girl friend, Fanny Goldberg, there. At his sister's direction he took her fur coat and a fox collar to the Solomon Fur Company, in the State-Lake building, at 190 North State street. He left the house about 9:30 o'clock a. m. and reached Solomon's place about 10 o'clock. He was not acquainted with Solomon but introduced himself as Mrs. Harris' brother. Solomon recognized the coat. It being Saturday, none of Solomon's employees were there and he did not want to repair the coat that day. Defendant insisted, because it was his sister's birthday and she wanted to use it that afternoon. Solomon agreed to repair the coat and it took about two hours to do it. Defendant received a receipt for the fox collar left in storage and later gave it to his sister. He left Solomon's place with the coat about a quarter of 12 o'clock and went over to a luggage store at 222 South Wabash avenue, intending to buy a grip for a birthday present to his sister. He got there about 12:15 and talked with Miss Laura Exelman, a clerk and a friend of his sister. She was the only one in the store at that time. She told him she intended to give his sister a grip and advised him not to buy one but to give her cash. From the luggage store he went straight home, arriving about 1:45 o'clock. As soon as he got there, his sister put the coat on and left with Mrs. Goldberg, returning about 6 o'clock p. m. Miss Exelman came out to dinner that evening. He remained there until about 1 o'clock that night. He had on a blue suit and a double-breasted blue overcoat that day. It had a half belt in the back and an ordinary collar. He wore a real light tan soft hat. About two years prior to February 3, 1934, a part of his right kneepcap was removed as the result of an automobile accident. After the operation he walked with a limp and was unable to throw his weight on his right side. He never was convicted of any violation of the law and had never been arrested before.

Maurice Solomon, the furrier, has his place of business in the State-Lake building, at 190 North State street, Chicago. He testified he had known Stella Harris five or six years. About 10 o'clock in the morning of February 3, 1934, defendant brought her fur coat and a fox collar to his place of business to have the coat repaired and the fox collar cleaned and stored. He was not acquainted with defendant, but recognized the coat because he had taken care of it for Mrs. Harris about five years. None of his employees were there, but defendant insisted on the coat being repaired as Mrs. Harris was going to a party or something. It took about an hour and a half to make the repairs. He gave defendant a receipt for the fur collar and defendant left about 11:30 or 11:45 o'clock. The price of the cleaning was $1 and the same price for storage. Defendant did not pay for the repair and he made no charge. He did not get Mrs. Harris' work the first year he was in business and made...

To continue reading

Request your trial
36 cases
  • People v. Nims, 85-1707
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • December 12, 1986
    ...doubt as to the guilt of the accused, a judgment of conviction will not be permitted to stand. (People v. Ricili, 400 Ill. 309 ; People v. Gold, 361 Ill. 23 .) Where the conviction of a defendant rests upon identification which is doubtful, vague and uncertain, and which does not produce an......
  • Baker v. State
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court
    • December 13, 1956
    ...under the charge of robbery. He was not charged with public indecency under § 10-2801, Burns' 1956 Replacement. In People v. Gold, 1935, 361 Ill. 23, 31, 31, 196 N.E. 729, 732, the Supreme Court of Illinois reversed a conviction based on dubious identification which was contradicted by unim......
  • People v. Romo
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • June 13, 1980
    ... ... Figueroa stated that even though defendant spoke English, "as scared as I was, anyone could understand him." Defendant told Figueroa that he was a detective and showed him some handcuffs and "something that looked like a gold star" in a black wallet. He than asked to see Figueroa's driver's license. When Figueroa took out his wallet to show defendant his license, defendant "grabbed" the wallet and before returning it to him, removed all the money from it. Figueroa stated that he knew that defendant had taken $170 ... ...
  • People v. Wilbert
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • November 14, 1973
    ... ...         Mr. Elders was also asked by defense counsel what the defendant was wearing on the evening of the shooting and he said, 'I think he had on a gold jacket. I didn't look at his trousers.' Defense counsel again confronted Elders with the statement he gave to the police and in which he had stated the defendant was wearing a green jacket at the time of the shooting. However, Mr. Elders reaffirmed his testimony that the jacket was gold and ... ...
  • 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