People v. Heimann
| Decision Date | 04 April 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. 3-85-0291,3-85-0291 |
| Citation | 96 Ill.Dec. 593,142 Ill.App.3d 197,491 N.E.2d 872 |
| Parties | , 96 Ill.Dec. 593 PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kenneth L. HEIMANN, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
Peter A. Carusona, Robert Agostinelli, Office of State Appellate Defender, Ottawa, for defendant-appellant.
David R. Zwicker, State's Atty., Aledo, Gerald P. Ursini, John X. Breslin, State's Attys. Appellate Service Com'n, Ottawa, for plaintiff-appellee.
Following a bench trial, the defendant, Kenneth L. Heimann, was convicted of driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI) (Ill.Rev.Stat.1983, ch. 95 1/2, par. 11-501(a)(2)), and sentenced to 30 days of incarceration in the Mercer County Jail. On appeal, the defendant argues that the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he either drove or had actual physical control of a motor vehicle.
The agreed statement of facts set forth the following. On November 30, 1984, the defendant testified that he met Kathy in a tavern. When they later left together between 11 p.m. and midnight, the defendant asked Kathy to drive his automobile, as he was on court supervision for a prior DUI. The defendant made sexual advances toward Kathy while she was driving and caused her to lose control of the automobile and strike a traffic control sign. The car continued down the street and then smashed into a nearby tree. The defendant and Kathy pushed the car back onto the roadway and then attempted to push the car down the road. After only pushing it a short distance, they decided to return to the tavern. The defendant drank to excess and then returned to his auto to remove some personal belongings.
Officer Baird testified that at approximately 2:24 a.m., he saw the defendant unsuccessfully attempting to start his automobile when it was parked on a downhill incline along a street in Matherville. Officer Baird noticed that the defendant emitted a strong alcoholic odor and was unable to walk unassisted. After hearing the defendant speak, and observing his actions, Officer Baird concluded that the defendant was intoxicated. The defendant disputed Officer Baird's testimony.
The front end of the defendant's vehicle was damaged. Officer Baird followed a trail of antifreeze several hundred feet from the auto's leaking radiator to a recently damaged tree. Officer Baird also discovered that paint from a nearby damaged traffic control sign matched paint on the automobile's front bumper. The car was towed and ultimately "junked".
Based on its findings that the intoxicated defendant was behind the wheel attempting to start the car, the court found that the defendant was "in control" of the automobile, and thus guilty of DUI, though not guilty of either improper lane usage or leaving the scene of a property damage accident.
An essential element of DUI is that the accused drove or was in actual physical control of a vehicle. (Ill.Rev.Stat.1983, ch. 95 1/2, par. 11-501(a)(2).) The issue herein is whether the defendant was in physical control of a vehicle. The defendant suggests that his inoperative automobile was not a "vehicle". However, any device which may transport a person is a vehicle. (Ill.Rev.Stat.1983, ch. 95 1/2, par. 1-217.) The defendant's automobile is clearly distinguishable from the vehicle described in People v. Johnson (4th Dist., 1976), 43 Ill.App.3d 428, 2 Ill.Dec. 86, 356 N.E.2d 1373. There, a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Morris
...seat with the ignition key and physically capable of starting the engine and moving the vehicle.” People v. Heimann, 142 Ill.App.3d 197, 199, 96 Ill.Dec. 593, 491 N.E.2d 872 (1986). Although Morris may not have been aware that his conduct might be illegal, that alone does not render the sta......
-
City of Naperville v. Watson
...the engine and moving the vehicle. See Davis, 205 Ill.App.3d at 435, 150 Ill.Dec. 349, 562 N.E.2d 1152; People v. Heimann, 142 Ill.App.3d 197, 199, 96 Ill.Dec. 593, 491 N.E.2d 872 (1986). In a number of cases, individuals discovered sleeping in vehicles have been found to be in actual physi......
-
People v. McGee, 1-93-0975
...349, 562 N.E.2d 1152; Karjala, 172 Ill.App.3d at 872, 122 Ill.Dec. 533, 526 N.E.2d 926, citing People v. Heinmann (1986), 142 Ill.App.3d 197, 199, 96 Ill.Dec. 593, 491 N.E.2d 872. In the instant case, the State failed to show, by direct or circumstantial evidence, that defendant was driving......
-
People v. Davis
...repeatedly singled out as indications that the motorist is in actual physical control of the vehicle. (People v. Heimann (1986), 142 Ill.App.3d 197, 96 Ill.Dec. 593, 491 N.E.2d 872; Gore v. Maryland (1988), 74 Md.App. 143, 536 A.2d 735; Garcia v. Schwendiman (Utah 1982), 645 P.2d 651.) Cour......