People v. Green
| Decision Date | 23 January 1962 |
| Docket Number | No. 36192,36192 |
| Citation | 23 Ill.2d 584,179 N.E.2d 644 |
| Parties | PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, v. Leslie GREEN, Plaintiff in Error. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
Florence R. Graham, Chicago, for plaintiff in error.
William G. Clark, Atty. Gen., and Daniel P. Ward, State's Atty., Chicago (Fred G. Leach, Asst. Atty. Gen., and John T. Gallagher and Leo F. Poch, Asst. State's Attys., Chicago, of counsel), for defendant in error.
Defendant, Leslie Green, was indicted in the criminal court of Cook County for murder of James Nelson. He pleaded not guilty, waived his right of jury trial, was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter, and sentenced to the penitentiary for a term of 5 to 10 years. He prosecutes this writ of error from that judgment.
The undisputed evidence reveals that on July 5, 1959, the defendant, his wife Mary Green, his mother-in-law Emma Clark, and James Nelson, who was living in a common-law marriage relationship with Emma Clark, lived together in an apartment in Chicago Heights. Emma Clark and James Nelson, returning from a trip to Kankakee, found the defendant and his wife at home. Nelson asked the Greens if they had a good Fourth of July vacation and Mary Green replied that she had not because her husband had beaten her. Thereupon a conversation ensued between the defendant and Nelson in which Nelson expressed disapproval of the defendant beating his wife. Nelson and Emma Clark soon thereafter left, went to her sister's home on 26th Street, and returned to the apartment about 11:30 P.M. About 12:10 A.M. that same night the police received a call reporting a shooting at the apartment. When they arrived they found Emma Clark and a neighbor trying to lift Nelson, who had blood on his chest, into a car. Nelson died shortly thereafter. Emma Clark informed the police that the defendant had shot James Nelson.
The rest of the testimony is in dispute. Emma Clark, testifying for the State, stated that when she and James Nelson went to her sister's home on 26th Street, the defendant followed them with a gun. She saw him walk into her sister's yard and then leave the yard to get into a car. They returned to the apartment house about 11:30 and she proceeded to their apartment, but Nelson stayed out in front. Mary Green was not home at that time. Soon Mary Green returned and entered the Green's bedroom. At that time defendant Leslie Green grabbed Mary, and Emma Clark heard a conversation between them. Mary then ran out the front door. A few minutes later, from her bedroom, Emma Clark looked out the door and saw the defendant walking with a rifle in his hand. When James Nelson entered the front door, the defendant raised the rifle and fired one shot. When he fired, Nelson ran to him and grabbed the rifle. Defendant and Nelson started wrestling and Nelson took the rifle out of defendant's hand and the gun broke in two. While they were continuing to wrestle, James hit the defendant over the head and shoulders with the barrel of the gun. James then told Emma that the defendant had shot him and they quit wrestling as James slid to the floor. Emma Clark further testified that the defendant was 15 feet from Nelson when defendant fired.
Cross-examination revealed that Emma Clark previously testified at the coroner's inquest that when James Nelson came in the door, she asked him where he had been and upon receiving an answer, she turned back to her bedroom and soon thereafter heard a little 'ping.' She then went back into the room and called the police. On further cross-examination Emma Clark still insisted that she was looking at the defendant when he raised the rifle.
Albert Pascarella, a police officer, testified to the dying declaration of James Nelson in which he stated that the defendant shot him. On cross-examination he also testified that he took a statement from Emma Clark at the police station in which she said that she heard a gun go off but she did not see defendant point the rifle at Nelson and shoot him.
Albert Sauter, a police officer, testifying for the State, said that when he had a conversation with the defendant, and in response to Sauter's inquiry as to what had happened, the defendant stated that James Nelson had come into his bedroom, taken the gun from the corner and started beating him with it, that they struggled in the bedroom and into the front room, and the shot was fired while they were wrestling for the gun. Sauter further testified that Emma Clark stated she heard a shot fired when she was at her bedroom door.
The defendant, testifying in his own behalf, stated that Nelson entered the defendant's bedroom and went for the gun, which was located between the television and the door. The defendant grabbed him so that they went into the hallway where Nelson hit him with the gun, and they started tussling for it. Defendant further testified that he did not know when Nelson was shot, but he heard Nelson say 'I am shot' and they quit scuffling. Defendant denied that he had ever pulled the trigger or shot Nelson.
It is defendant's contention that the verdict of involuntary manslaughter is against the manifest weight of the evidence in that there was no evidence whatsoever of manslaughter presented at the trial; that the defendant did not receive the speedy trial to which he was entitled by statute and by the constitution; that he did not waive such right; that the verdict of the trial court should be set aside and the defendant released; and that to order a new trial on a charge of murder would constitute double jeopardy. The State contends that where the evidence would justify the court in finding the defendant guilty of murder, the defendant cannot complain that he has been found guilty of a lesser offense, manslaughter, and that the defendant was tried within the provision of the four-months statute.
In his insistence that a verdict of manslaughter is against the manifest weight of the evidence, defendant relies primarily on People v. Newman, 360 Ill. 226, 195 N.E. 645, where we reversed a conviction of manslaughter on the ground that there was no evidence in the record upon which such a verdict could be based. We found that the evidence indicated only two possible conclusions: either the defendant acted in self-defense or was guilty of deliberate murder. We have also held that an instruction defining manslaughter should not be given when the evidence admits only the conclusion that the crime was murder. (People v. Pokosa, 342 Ill. 404, 174 N.E. 544.) If, however, there is evidence in the record...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Boyd
...denied the motion for discharge (People v. Criss (1977), 45 Ill.App.3d 973, 4 Ill.Dec. 607, 360 N.E.2d 543; See also People v. Green (1962), 23 Ill.2d 584, 179 N.E.2d 644). Likewise, we believe the trial court correctly denied defendant's renewed motions for discharge on February 3, 1977 an......
-
People v. Falkner
...defendant has no 'right' to restrict the judge's determination to the question of his guilt or innocence of murder. (See, e.g. People v. Green, 23 Ill.2d 584 .) And if the evidence would support a verdict of manslaughter, a defendant will not be heard to complain that a manslaughter instruc......
-
People v. Adams, Gen. No. 52355
...voluntary manslaughter on an indictment for murder, provided there is evidence to support the lower grade of homicide. People v. Green, 23 Ill.2d 584, 179 N.E.2d 644; People v. Lewis, 375 Ill. 330, 31 N.E.2d 795. As defendant points out, conviction of the lesser crime of voluntary manslaugh......
-
People v. Taylor
... ... (See e.g. People v ... Green, 23 Ill.2d 584, 179 N.E.2d 644.) And if the evidence would support a verdict of manslaughter, a defendant will not be heard to complain that a manslaughter instruction was given, even though he did not request it. 'Where the record contains evidence upon which a verdict of manslaughter may be ... ...