People v. Graydon

• Decision Date: 10 June 1976
• Docket Number: No. 13032,13032
• Citation: People v. Graydon, 349 N.E.2d 127, 38 Ill.App.3d 792 (Ill. App. 1976)
• Parties: PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Johnny GRAYDON, Defendant-Appellant.
• Court: Appellate Court of Illinois

Page 127

349 N.E.2d 127

38 Ill.App.3d 792

PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v.Johnny GRAYDON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 13032.

Appellate Court of Illinois, Fourth District.

June 10, 1976.

Richard J. Wilson, DeputyState Appellate Defender, Bruce Stratton, Administrative Director, Springfield, for defendant-appellant.

John G. Satter, Jr., State's Atty., Pontiac, G. Michael Prall, Principal Atty., Illinois State's Attys.Assn., Statewide Appellate Assistance Service, Springfield, Jeffrey B. Levens, Law School Graduate, Loyola University School of Law, for plaintiff-appellee.

TRAPP, Presiding Justice.

Defendant was convicted of theft and robbery following jury verdicts.He appeals the convictions and the respective concurrent sentences of 2 to 6 and 5 to 15 years.

The issues argued upon appeal are that (1)the prosecution failed to prove that defendant intended to permanently deprive the owner of the use of the automobile taken ¹ and (2) that the sentence of 5 to 15 years for the offense of robbery was excessive.

Between 10:00 P.M. and midnight one evening, the complainant was driving his car on I--55 from Morton Grove, Illinois, to Joliet, Illinois, when he picked up the defendant, a hitchhiker.When the complainant was about to let defendant out of the car, defendant turned to complainant and told him that, unless he continued to drive, defendant would shoot him.As they proceeded south on I--55, defendant asked for and received complainant's wallet which contained $26.At defendant's insistence, they pulled over to the side of the road at which time they switched places and defendant informed complainant that they were going to drive to Memphis, Tennessee.

About ten to twenty miles further down the road, defendant pulled into a gas station near Dwight, Illinois, where complainant jumped out of the car and ran towards a uniformed police officer who was standing at the station door.Complainant told the officer that defendant had a gun and was stealing his car.As the police officer moved toward the car, defendant drove out of the station at a high rate of speed.As defendant headed south on I--55, he was pursued by two officers and the complainant in a squad car.A high speed chase ensued but the officers were unable to catch defendant and lost sight of him just north of Odell, Illinois.After continuing along I--55 for a few more miles, the officers turned off I--55 at Odell where they observed the car parked near a gas station and defendant walking away from it.Defendant was then taken into custody.

Relying upon People v. Woods, 17 Ill.App.3d 835, 308 N.E.2d 856, defendant first argues that his short drive and subsequent abandonment of the vehicle was merely a 'joy ride', and thus evidence of intent to permanently deprive was not sufficiently established so as to sustain the theft conviction.Woods involved a guilty plea to the charge of theft, and the trial court's failure to determine that there was a factual basis for the plea and that defendant understood the nature of the charge as required by Supreme Court Rule 402(Ill.Rev.Stat.1973, ch. 110A, 402).In that case, the factual basis was not sufficient to support the plea because the defendant indicated that, in taking the car, he intended to 'joy ride' only.

A more analogous case is People v. Wright, 24 Ill.App.3d 26, 320 N.E.2d 483.In that case, the defendant and another man robbed the complainant and took the complainant's car from his presence.The complainant managed to escape, a high speed police chase followed, and the car collided with another vehicle.On...