People v. Jackson
| Decision Date | 23 March 1962 |
| Docket Number | No. 36329,36329 |
| Citation | 24 Ill.2d 226,181 N.E.2d 66 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, v. A. D. JACKSON, Plaintiff in Error. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
Basil P. Mann, Chicago, for plaintiff in error.
William G. Clark, Atty. Gen., and Daniel P. Ward, State's Atty., Chicago , for defendant in error.
The defendant, A. D. Jackson, was indicted At about 11:00 P.M. on the night of July 4, for the crime of rape. He waived a trial by jury, was tried before the court, found guilty, and sentenced to five years imprisonment in the penitentiary. Upon this writ of error he urges that the State failed to prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
The complaining witness was a waitress who worked from midnight to 8:00 A.M. At about 11:00 P.M. on the night of July 4, 1959, she left her apartment on the south side of Chicago to go to work. While walking past a building at 6449-51 Minerva she noticed a man coming toward her from the vestibule of the building. He lunged at her, got one arm around her, and pressed something into her side, saying, 'Keep walking, bitch, and don't say a word.' They walked a short distance into an alley and then down some steps into the basement of a building. He forced her back against a wall, went through her purse and dropped it to the ground. During this time she and her assailant were face to face, and she had a good opportunity to study his appearance. He forced her to lie down, and had sexual intercourse with her. He then ordered her to go one way and he went the other. She returned at once to her apartment building and told her landlady that she had been raped. The police were called and they took her first to the basement where the crime had taken place, where they found some of the contents of her purse, and they then took her to a hospital. It was stipulated that the examining physician would testify that sperm were present. Two days later, on the evening of July 6, two police officers went to the defendant's apartment and asked him to come to the station with them, where he was identified by the prosecutrix from a line-up of six men.
The defendant testified in his own behalf and denied having committed the crime. He said that he had been in his apartment all that night with the woman with whom he lived, and her son. He testified that he had stayed up until 11:30 P.M., watching television, and that his 'stepson' had come into the apartment at 10:15 and left an hour later. The woman, Willie Mae Williams, testified that she had been up with the defendant until after 11:00. On rebuttal, however, the prosecutrix, a police officer, and another witness all testified that in the presence of the defendant, at the police station on July 6, Mrs. Williams had said that she had gone to bed at 10:00 or 10:30 that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Lilly
...386) and here even her uncontradicted testimony was corroborated, (People v. Canale, 52 Ill.2d 107, 285 N.E.2d 133; People v. Jackson, 24 Ill.2d 226, 181 N.E.2d 66.) Defendant argues that the victim had several opportunities to escape and that she did not struggle. On cross-examination the ......
-
People v. Putney
...tests promptly administered to Mrs. Jackson indicated recent sexual intercourse and the presence of male sperm. See People v. Jackson, 24 Ill.2d 226, 181 N.E.2d 66. The knife brandished by the defendant was given to a deputy sheriff and was admitted into evidence by the trial court. The loa......
- People v. Love