People v. Jackson

Decision Date15 April 1968
Docket NumberGen. No. 51243
Citation95 Ill.App.2d 28,237 N.E.2d 858
PartiesPEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Appellee, v. Willie C. JACKSON, Appellant.
CourtUnited States Appellate Court of Illinois

John J. Stamos, State's Atty., County of Cook, Chicago, for appellee, Elmer C. Kissane, James Zagel, David B. Selig, Asst. State's Attys., of counsel.

Gerald W. Getty, Public Defender of Cook County, Chicago, for appellant, Paul Bradley, James J. Doherty, Asst. Public Defenders, of counsel.

BURMAN, Presiding Justice.

The defendant, Willie C. Jackson, was tried before a judge sitting without a jury under a two count indictment which charged him with rape and attempt rape. Defendant, after a trial, was found guilty of attempt rape, and after a hearing in aggravation and mitigation, was sentenced to a term of not less than ten nor more than fourteen years in the Illinois State Penitentiary. The defendant appeals from the judgment entered on the verdict. No questions are raised on the pleadings.

The defendant contends, on appeal, that (1) sufficient credible evidence was not introduced at trial identifying him as the perpetrator of the offense charged, and (2) that the prosecutor introduced incompetent evidence in aggravation which resulted in the imposition of an excessive sentence upon him.

Mrs. Ruth Lanier, the prosecutrix, testified that on September 8, 1965, at about 9:00 or 9:30 p.m., she was in the basement of her apartment with her daughter washing clothes when a man entered the basement and asked directions as to how to get to Springfield. Mrs. Lanier told the man he was far out of his way. The man then started to approach Mrs. Lanier and her eleven year old daughter, Ruth Mae. He pulled a gun out of his pocket and Ruth Mae began to scream. The man told Mrs. Lanier that if she didn't stop her daughter from screaming he would kill the girl. He then forced Mrs. Lanier and her daughter into a closet in the basement, told Mrs. Lanier to come back out, and proceeded to lock Ruth Mae inside the closet, where the girl remained screaming throughout the entire incident. The man told Mrs. Lanier to lie down, and she complied with his request, lying down on her stomach. He then told her to turn over; he unzipped his pants, and got on top of Mrs. Lanier for about two minutes. 'During the two minutes he inserted his penis into my vagina.' Mrs. Lanier further testified that during the two minutes the man was on top of her she was able to observe his face, haircut, and clothes.

On direct examination, Mrs. Lanier testified that the man had achieved penetration; however, on cross-examination she admitted that she had told the police after the incident that she didn't think the man had been able to achieve penetration 'because it didn't seem to be hard.' A vaginal smear taken from Mrs. Lanier on the night of the incident revealed the presence of sperm. Mrs. Lanier further testified that on October 10, 1965, she had picked the man out of a six-man lineup at the Filmore Police Station; and she then proceeded to identify the defendant, in court, as the man who had been in her apartment on the night of September 8th, and as the man she had identified in the lineup of October 10th. On cross-examination, Mrs. Lanier testified that she didn't see a scar on the defendant's forehead, although later testimony revealed that he did have one. On redirect she testified that she had told the police about her attacker's height, skin color, and the color of his shirt, pants, jacket and shoes. She also told the police about the weight of her attacker.

The testimony of Ruth Mae Lanier essentially corroborated her mother's version of what occurred on the night in question. She further testified that she had seen the man once before the night of the incident in the alley outside of her apartment. She then identified the defendant as the man who had been in the apartment on the night of September 8th, and further stated that she had recognized him in the lineup of October 10th.

Police Officer George Mays testified that he had arrested the defendant on October 9, 1965, and that the defendant was carrying a toy pistol in his coat at that time.

The defendant, testifying in his own defense, denied the entire incident. He stated that he did not leave his home at 1515 East 65th Place on the evening of September 8, 1965, until 10:00 or 10:15 P.M., at which time he left for work at the Princeton Plating Company, which is located in the 300 block of West 29th Street. He testified that he had been at home watching television on the night in question until he left for work. The defendant further testified that he had paid the rent at around 7:30 P.M. on September 8th, and a rent receipt tending to corroborate this testimony was introduced in evidence. A time card from the Princeton Plating Company, which showed the time at which the defendant reported for work, was also introduced in evidence.

The defendant's alibi was essentially corroborated by his wife, sister and brother, all of whom lived in the same building along with the defendant.

The defendant contends that the evidence as to his guilt is not sufficient because the testimony of Mrs. Lanier and her daughter is not credible, particularly in regard to the identification of the defendant as the perpetrator of the alleged act, whereas the defendant has denied his participation and his alibi has been supported by the uncontradicted...

To continue reading

Request your trial
16 cases
  • People v. Lenair
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • September 23, 1970
    ...of the witnesses and the weight to be given their testimony. People v. Parker, 120 Ill.App.2d 71, 256 N.E.2d 67; People v. Jackson, 95 Ill.App.2d 28, 237 N.E.2d 858. We will not substitute our judgment on credibility for that of the trial judge unless the evidence is so improbable or unsati......
  • People v. Garriott
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • June 21, 1974
    ... ... The courts of this state have repeatedly held that the fact that a defendant denies guilt and that defense witnesses corroborate his alibi, does not, in and of itself create a reasonable doubt as to his guilt. People v. Jackson, 95 Ill.App.2d 28, 237 N.E.2d 858. A jury is under no obligation to believe the defendant's alibi evidence which is contradictory to positive evidence of the prosecutrix. People v. Newson, 133 Ill.App.2d 391, 273 N.E.2d 416; People v. Thomas, 130 Ill.App.2d 1107, 266 N.E.2d 721 and People v ... ...
  • People v. Wright
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • May 27, 1970
    ...alibi evidence over the positive identification by Mrs. Scott. People v. Setzke, 22 Ill.2d 582, 177 N.E.2d 168; People v. Jackson, 95 Ill.App.2d 28, 32, 237 N.E.2d 858. The trial judge, as he had the power to do, disbelieved the alibi evidence and believed the State's witnesses which includ......
  • People v. Knowles
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • October 1, 1970
    ...identification by the prosecutrix, even though the alibi testimony was given by a greater number of witnesses. People v. Jackson, 95 Ill.App.2d 28, 237 N.E.2d 858 (1968). The trial court itself, at the conclusion of the trial, 'From all the testimony offered and based on the Court's observa......
  • 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