People v. Lego, No. 37712

CourtSupreme Court of Illinois
Writing for the CourtSOLFISBURG
Citation32 Ill.2d 76,203 N.E.2d 875
Decision Date21 January 1965
Docket NumberNo. 37712
PartiesThe PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, v. Don Richard LEGO, Plaintiff in Error.

Page 875

203 N.E.2d 875
32 Ill.2d 76
The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error,
v.
Don Richard LEGO, Plaintiff in Error.
No. 37712.
Supreme Court of Illinois.
Jan. 21, 1965.

[32 Ill.2d 77]

Page 877

Kenneth J. Brundage, Chicago, for plaintiff in error.

William G. Clark, Atty. Gen., Springfield, and Daniel P. Ward, State's Atty., Chicago (Fred G. Leach and George W. Kenney, Asst. Attys. Gen., and Elmer C. Kissane and John Gannon, Asst. State's Attys., of counsel), for defendant in error.

SOLFISBURG, Justice.

The defendant, Don Richard Lego, was indicted in the criminal court of Cook County on the charge of robbery. He was tried by a jury, found guilty and sentenced by the court to a term in the penitentiary of not less than 25 nor more than 50 years. He prosecutes this writ of error from that judgment.

Defendant complains that he was denied due process of law, contending that a question of insanity was raised and the trial court erred in not conducting a sanity hearing before a jury pursuant to statute.

The basis for defendant's objection is that on the day of trial the public defender informed the court that he had just been handed a note written and signed by the defendant, which stated as follows: 'I feel I am not competent to stand trial due to the fact I suffer from blackout spells.' The attorney for the defendant then moved the court for a Behavior Clinic examination. This motion was denied by the court.

[32 Ill.2d 78] Although there was no formal request for a sanity hearing and no suggestion of insanity as such, defendant argues on appeal that the note and motion for a Behavior Clinic examination was sufficient to require the court to conduct a sanity hearing and that failure to do so was a violation of due process.

The trial, adjudication, sentence or execution of a person charged with a criminal offense, while insane, is a violation of due process of law. (People v. Burson, 11 Ill.2d 360, 143 N.E.2d 239; People v. Reeves, 412 Ill. 155, 107 N.E.2d 861; People v. Maynard, 347 Ill. 422, 179 N.E. 833.) This court has held that a formal petition for a sanity hearing is not necessary. The question of a defendant's sanity may be raised by oral suggestions of counsel during the trial, and if made in good faith, it becomes the duty of the court ot conduct a hearing before a jury upon the issue, and the denial thereof is a violation of due process. (People v. Burson, 11 Ill.2d 360, 143 N.E.2d 239; Brown v. People, 8 Ill.2d 540, 134 N.E.2d 760.) A trial judge has a duty to impanel a jury to determine whether an accused is capable of understanding the nature of the charges against him and of co-operating with his counsel whenever facts that give rise to a bona fide doubt as to the defendant's sanity are brought to the attention of the trial court, either from observation of the defendant or from suggestion by counsel. People v. Harper, 31 Ill.2d 51, 198 N.E.2d 825; People v. Richeson, 24 Ill.2d 182, 181 N.E.2d 170; People v. Burson, 11 Ill.2d 360, 143 N.E.2d 239.

Counsel's motion for a Behavior Clinic examination alone was insufficient to raise a bona fide question as to the defendant's capacity to stand trial. (People v. Harper, 31 Ill.2d 51, 198 N.E.2d 825; People v. Cleggett, 22...

To continue reading

Request your trial
25 practice notes
  • Lego v. Twomey 8212 5037, No. 70
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • January 12, 1972
    ...it could be used in judging guilt or innocence.3 On direct appeal the Illinois Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. People v. Lego, 32 Ill.2d 76, 203 N.E.2d 875 (1965). Four years later petitioner challenged his conviction by seeking a writ of habeas corpus in the United States District C......
  • United States ex rel. Lego v. Pate, No. 69 C 754.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court (Northern District of Illinois)
    • January 13, 1970
    ...petitioner appealed directly to the Illinois Supreme Court. That Court affirmed the judgment of the trial court. People v. Lego, 32 Ill.2d 76, 203 N.E.2d 875 (1965). Petitioner has also sought post-conviction relief via both post-conviction and habeas corpus (federal and state) petitions.1 ......
  • People v. Skorusa, No. 40399
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • November 30, 1973
    ...court to order a competency hearing. See People v. Pridgen, 37 Ill.2d 295, 226 N.E.2d 598; People v. Lego, 32 Ill.2d [55 Ill.2d 583] 76, 203 N.E.2d 875; People v. McGuirk, 106 Ill.App.2d 266, 245 N.E.2d 617; People lv. Stoudt, 90 Ill.App.2d 140, 232 N.E.2d Defense counsel attempts to distin......
  • People v. Allen, No. 53173
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • January 20, 1984
    ...(1964), 31 Ill.2d 262, 264, 201 N.E.2d 394; People v. Reeves (1952), 412 Ill. 555, 561, 107 N.E.2d 861; see also People v. Lego (1965), 32 Ill.2d 76, 78, 203 N.E.2d 875; People v. Burson (1957), 11 Ill.2d 360, 368, 143 N.E.2d 239.) The petition for further testing and Dr. Kaplan's supportin......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
25 cases
  • Lego v. Twomey 8212 5037, No. 70
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • January 12, 1972
    ...it could be used in judging guilt or innocence.3 On direct appeal the Illinois Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. People v. Lego, 32 Ill.2d 76, 203 N.E.2d 875 (1965). Four years later petitioner challenged his conviction by seeking a writ of habeas corpus in the United States District C......
  • United States ex rel. Lego v. Pate, No. 69 C 754.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court (Northern District of Illinois)
    • January 13, 1970
    ...petitioner appealed directly to the Illinois Supreme Court. That Court affirmed the judgment of the trial court. People v. Lego, 32 Ill.2d 76, 203 N.E.2d 875 (1965). Petitioner has also sought post-conviction relief via both post-conviction and habeas corpus (federal and state) petitions.1 ......
  • People v. Skorusa, No. 40399
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • November 30, 1973
    ...court to order a competency hearing. See People v. Pridgen, 37 Ill.2d 295, 226 N.E.2d 598; People v. Lego, 32 Ill.2d [55 Ill.2d 583] 76, 203 N.E.2d 875; People v. McGuirk, 106 Ill.App.2d 266, 245 N.E.2d 617; People lv. Stoudt, 90 Ill.App.2d 140, 232 N.E.2d Defense counsel attempts to distin......
  • People v. Allen, No. 53173
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • January 20, 1984
    ...(1964), 31 Ill.2d 262, 264, 201 N.E.2d 394; People v. Reeves (1952), 412 Ill. 555, 561, 107 N.E.2d 861; see also People v. Lego (1965), 32 Ill.2d 76, 78, 203 N.E.2d 875; People v. Burson (1957), 11 Ill.2d 360, 368, 143 N.E.2d 239.) The petition for further testing and Dr. Kaplan's supportin......
  • 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