People v. Hamm

Decision Date20 May 1953
Docket NumberNo. 32731,32731
Citation112 N.E.2d 485,415 Ill. 224
PartiesPEOPLE v. HAMM.
CourtIllinois Supreme Court

Merle Hamm, pro se.

Latham Castle, Atty. Gen., and Martin J. Corbell, State's Atty., Vandalia (Fred G. Leach, Decatur, and Harry L. Pate, Tuscola, of counsel), for defendant in error.

HERSHEY, Justice.

Merle Hamm, defendant below, was convicted at the February, 1950, term of the circuit court of Fayette County, of the crime of escaping from the Illinois State Farm at Vandalia. He brings this writ of error to review that judgment of conviction.

At the February, 1950, term of the circuit court of Fayette County the defendant was indicted for the crime of escaping from the Illinois State Farm at Vandalia. The indictment contained three counts, each charging the same crime in different language. Judge Joe Dees, an attorney of that county, was appointed to represent the defendant. He was then duly arraigned and entered a plea of guilty, which the court refused to accept, admonishing the defendant of the consequences of his plea. Defendant persisted in his plea of guilty and waived trial by jury, whereupon he was adjudged guilty of the crime charged. He was then sentenced to the Illinois State Penitentiary for a minimum term of five years and a maximum term of ten years in accordance with section 5 of the act in relation to the Illinois State Farm. Ill.Rev.Stat.1949, chap. 118, par. 18.

Defendant assigns error claiming that the indictment under which he was convicted was void for the reason that it purports to be a 'True Bill' although count II thereof contains false and erroneous information. Count II of the indictment, in the first part thereof, asserts that the defendant was convicted of stealing the property of one William Oney in Whiteside County, and as a result of his conviction on said charge was sentenced to the State Farm in Fayette County. This, the defendant contends, was false and erroneous for the reason that the information on which he was convicted in Whiteside County charged that the property alleged to have been stolen by him was the property of Floyd Hamm. He, therefore, complains that he was convicted, sentenced, and committed to the Illinois State Farm for an alleged crime other than that stated in count II of the indictment.

In support of his contentions defendant presents an 'Exhibit B' purported to be a certified record of the proceedings of the county court of Whiteside County, wherein defendant was tried, convicted, and sentenced to the Illinois State Farm. This cause comes here on the common-law record, and our inquiry is circumscribed by what is contained in that record. Where the alleged error is without basis in the common-law record, it is not open to consideration in the absence of a bill of exceptions. People v. Sweeney, 409 Ill. 223, 99 N.E.2d 143; People v. Baldridge, 403 Ill. 606, 87 N.E.2d 782; People v. Corrie, 387 Ill. 587, 56 N.E.2d 767. This 'Exhibit B' is not, nor does it purport to be, any part of the common-law record here submitted. Neither is it nor does it purport to be a part of any bill of exceptions in this cause, as none is presented. Therefore, there is no basis for according it consideration in support of the error assigned by defendant.

Even if count II of this indictment were defective, it does not follow...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • People v. Hill
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • May 22, 1959
    ...chap. 38, par. 228b. Moreover, it unmistakably informed the defendant of the precise offense with which he was charged. People v. Hamm, 415 Ill. 224, 112 N.E.2d 485. No bill of particulars was requested. 'Niceties and strictness of pleadings are supported only where a defendant would be oth......
  • People v. Hurt
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • May 23, 1956
    ... ... 223, 160 N.E. 582. The defendant's general plea of guilty was directed to the whole indictment, People v. Creviston, 396 Ill. 78, 71 N.E.2d 25, and where one of several counts of [8 Ill.2d 494] an indictment is sufficient to sustain the judgment, the conviction will stand. People v. Hamm, 415 Ill. 224, 112 N.E.2d 485; People v. Donaldson, 341 Ill. 369, 173 N.E. 357 ...         The assignments of error are without merit and the ... ...
  • People v. Williams
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • November 23, 1955
    ... ... People v. Hamm, 415 Ill. 224, 112 N.E.2d 485; People v. Pond, 390 Ill. 237, 61 N.E.2d 37; People v. Kobylak, 383 Ill. 432, 50 N.E.2d 465; People v. Shaver, 367 Ill. 339, 11 N.E.2d 400 ...         The last two contentions are based upon affidavits executed by the defendant's father and brother, and by a ... ...

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