People v. Kilgore
| Decision Date | 18 November 1974 |
| Docket Number | No. 46406,46406 |
| Citation | 319 N.E.2d 489,59 Ill.2d 173 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Appellant, v. Larry KILGORE, Appellee. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
William J. Scott, Atty. Gen., Springfield, and Bernard Carey, State's Atty., Chicago (James B. Zagel, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Patrick T. Driscoll, Jr., and Dennis J. O'Hara, Asst. State's Attys. of counsel), for the People.
Edward M. Genson, Chicago, for appellee.
On May 17, 1969, 17-year-old Michael Causher was shot in the head and killed in front of a laundromat at 5056 South Cottage Grove Avenue in Chicago. For that murder Larry Kilgore, Ricky Smith, Henry Horton and Norvell Ealey were indicted and tried by a jury in the Cook County circuit court. Verdicts of not guilty were directed at the close of defendants' case as to all defendants except Kilgore, as to whom a guilty verdict was returned and a sentence of 15 to 30 years imposed. The First District Appellate Court reversed the conviction because of the absence of proof beyond a reasonable doubt of Kilgore's guilt. (15 Ill.App.3d 862, 305 N.E.2d 328.) We granted the State's petition for leave to appeal and now affirm the appellate court.
The real issue at trial was the identity of the person firing the fatal shot, and whether others might be guilty on an accountability theory. The jury apparently believed Kilgore either shot the victim or was present and accountable, and the State here urges the appellate court substituted its judgment for what was properly a matter for jury determination.
It is here urged that the proof shows the four defendants were occupants of a vehicle that stopped at the scene of the killing; that one of the four left the car and fired two shots, fatally wounding the victim. It is of course clear that unless the proof establishes beyond a reasonable doubt that Kilgore fired the gun or was otherwise accountable, the appellate court was correct in its holding.
The only evidence linking defendant with the crime is the identification testimony adduced at trial. James Edwards testified that he was standing within 15 feet of the victim when the shots were fired. He observed an auto with five occupants pull up to the south curb at 51st Street. He knew four of the occupants, Kilgore and the other defendants, but did not know the fifth. He saw Norvell Ealey jump out of the car, run across the street, shout 'Blackstone' and shoot down the victim. Ealey then ran east on 51st with the auto following, and when the car caught up, Ealey got in. Edwards testified that he, the victim, and several other witnesses were members of a street gang, and it was intimated that the occupants of the auto were members of a rival gang. Edwards described Ealey, the man he saw running away, as being five feet, seven or eight inches in height, slender, about 18 or 19 years old and dark-completed. Edwards also testified that Kilgore approached him several days after the shooting and told him, 'We got your boy and the same thing that happened to Jay Hawk (the victim) will happen to you.'
In contrast to Edwards's version of the event, Edward Levy testified that he was walking west on the south side of 51st Street near Cottage Grove at the time in question, and after hearing two shots he observed a tall, heavy, black man with a 'bush' haircut wearing blue jeans and a blue jacket running east on the opposite side of 51st Street. Levy saw this man tuck a gun in his coat. He identified defendant Kilgore at trial as that man, and indicated he had known defendant prior to the occurrence. Levy did not see a dark, slender man going east on 51st Street, nor did he see the auto testified to by Edwards. One of Levy's companions, Yvette Winchester, heard the shots and saw a man with a husky build and a 'bush' haircut running east on 51st Street. She, being nearsighted and without glasses, could not identify the man, nor could she state whether the man was black or white.
Leon Ligon was sitting in a restaurant on the corner of Cottage Grove and 51st Street at the time in question. He heard two shots and observed through the restaurant window a six-foot tall, heavy, black man wearing dark clothing and a natural haircut run across Cottage Grove. He could not identify the individual. Michael Woodson was also in the restaurant and testified that Ligon was outside at the time of the shooting and came back in shouting the victim...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Nims, 85-1707
...because the evidence failed to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was the offender in People v. Kilgore (1974), 59 Ill.2d 173, 178, 319 N.E.2d 489. The court stated, "While questions of credibility and weight are for the jury, and we do not lightly take the step of rever......
-
People v. Loera
...house, where defendant resided. The cases cited by defendant in support of his claim do not sway us. For example, in People v. Kilgore (1974), 59 Ill.2d 173, 319 N.E.2d 489, while one person identified Kilgore as the man running from a shooting scene, the only eyewitness to the shooting tes......
-
People v. Baker
...v. McGee (1961), 21 Ill.2d 440, 173 N.E.2d 434; People v. Kilgore (1st Dist.1973), 15 Ill.App.3d 862, 305 N.E.2d 328, Aff'd., 59 Ill.2d 173, 319 N.E.2d 489; People v. Carroll (1st Dist.1970), 119 Ill.App.2d 314, 256 N.E.2d 153.) Unlike those cases, we have found the identification testimony......
-
People v. Brandon, s. 1-86-2220
...contention that the identifications were insufficient are factually distinguishable and, therefore, unpersuasive. People v. Kilgore (1974), 59 Ill.2d 173, 319 N.E.2d 489 (three different descriptions of perpetrator); People v. Gardner (1966), 35 Ill.2d 564, 221 N.E.2d 232 (inconsistencies i......