People v. Kulig

• Decision Date: 08 February 1940
• Docket Number: No. 25369.,25369.
• Citation: 373 Ill. 102,25 N.E.2d 73
• Parties: PEOPLE v. KULIG.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

373 Ill. 102

25 N.E.2d 73

PEOPLE

v.KULIG.

No. 25369.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Dec. 15, 1939.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 8, 1940.

Error to Criminal Court, Cook County; Daniel P. Trude, Judge.

Julius Kulig was convicted of larceny of a motor vehicle, and he brings error.

Affirmed.Benjamin C. Bachrach and Lester N. Grossman, both of Chicago (Walter Bachrach and Arthur Magid, both of Chicago, of counsel), for plaintiff in error.

John E. Cassidy, Atty. Gen., Thomas J. Courtney, State's Atty., of Chicago, and A. B. Dennis, of Springfield (Edward E. Wilson, John T. Gallagher, Melvin S. Rembe, and Blair L. Varnes, all of Chicago, of counsel), for defendant in error.

FARTHING, Justice.

Julius Kulig has sued out this writ of error to reverse a judgment and sentence of the criminal court of Cook county against him for larceny of a motor vehicle. The trial was had without a jury.

Robert M. Cronin's two-door Ford sedan car remained where he had locked and left it earlier in the evening in front of his home at 7109 Indiana avenue, Chicago, until twenty minutes after 1:00 o'clock on the morning of June 6, 1939. Some time before 4:00 o'clock in the morning of June 6, two policemen were cruising the streets of Chicago and noticed this Ford car following a truck on Roosevelt road. They followed it and after a time the driver made a ‘U’ turn. When the police car, which was plainly marked as such, turned to follow the Ford, the driver of the latter car increased his speed to about 70 miles an hour. The officers fired five times at the Ford car with a shotgun. They punctured a tire and twenty-six pellets hit the car. The Ford car was finally stopped and the two men who were in the front seat jumped out of the right door and escaped. The driver of the squad car went down Paulina street to the first alley south of Roosevelt road where he left the other officer and immediately returned to the Ford car. He found the defendant on the floor between the seats of the automobile. He took defendant out and questioned him, but he denied knowing who owned the automobile or who was with him. The license plates found on the stolen Ford car belonged on the Chevrolet coupe of John Barry, another Chicago resident. Robert Cronin had notified the police that his car had been stolen on June 6 and he identified it as his on June 8.

The defendant contends that the evidence was not sufficient to overcome the presumption of his innocence, and that he was not proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. He also contends that his constitutional right not to be compelled to give evidence against himself was invaded by the holdings of this court that the unexplained possession of property recently stolen raises a presumption of guilt where the corpus delicti has been proved. People v. Strutynski, 367 Ill. 551, 12 N.E.2d 628;People v. Norris, 362 Ill. 492, 200 N.E. 330;People v. Overbey, 362 Ill. 488, 491, 200 N.E. 325. In the cases just cited, although the circumstances varied and in some instances the defendants had made inconsistent statements, they did not explain their possession of recently stolen property of which they had possession. In People v. Barnes, 311 Ill....