People v. Lewis
| Decision Date | 17 March 1954 |
| Docket Number | No. 33023,33023 |
| Citation | 2 Ill.2d 328,118 N.E.2d 259 |
| Parties | PEOPLE v. LEWIS. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
Henry Lewis, pro se.
Latham Castle, Atty. Gen., and James E. Bales, State's Atty., Dixon (Fred G. Leach, Decatur, and George W. Schwaner, Jr., Springfield, of counsel), for the People.
In 1949 plaintiff in error Henry Lewis, hereinafter referred to as defendant, pleaded guilty in the circuit court of Lee County to an indictment charging assault with intent to commit murder. He was sentenced to improsonment in the penitentiary for a term of not less than three nor more than twelve years. He brings the cause here for review by writ of error.
At the time of the judgment, defendant was 15 years of age. The offense was committed while he was a patient in the Dixon State Hospital, to which he had theretofore been committed as a feeble-minded person. Prior to the entry of a plea the State's Attorney filed a suggestion of mental incompetency, representing the above facts, and a jury was impanelled to determine defendant's present mental competence. The court also appointed three persons as attorneys and as guardians ad litem for defendant. A hearing was had on the question of mental competency, and the jury returned a verdict finding that defendant is not a feeble-minded person. Thereafter the defendant, after having had his legal rights explained to him and being duly admonished as to the consequences of a plea of guilty, persisted in such plea, and sentence was then imposed.
Appearing pro se, he now contends that the grand jury was illegally recalled after expiration of thirty days; that it was illegally constituted because of failure to comply with the Jury Commissioners Act; that he was unlawfully removed from the Dixon State Hospital for the present prosecution; that the duty of the State was to prove mental competency at the time of the offense, rather than at the time of trial; that his counsel were not effective in protecting his rights; that the court erred in appointing counsel without inquiring whether his relatives wished to engage other counsel for him; that defendant failed to understand the instructions and admonitions given by the court; and that the court had no jurisdiction over his person because of his prior adjudication as a feeble-minded person by the circuit court of Cook County.
At the September, 1953, term of this court, we had before us a petition by defendant for a writ of error under the Post Conviction Hearing Act. (Ill.Rev.Stat.1953, chap. 38, pars. 826-832.) We denied the writ of error, holding that there was no merit to his charges that the grand jury was illegally constituted and further holding that defendant was duly admonished as to the consequences of his plea and that he voluntarily pleaded guilty. Our prior determination is decisive as to those questions. Likewise, it is decisive as to all constitutional questions which were not raised, but which could have been raised under the Post Conviction Hearing Act. That act was designed to afford a complete remedy to all persons convicted of crime who claim that in the proceedings which resulted in their conviction their constitutional rights were violated, and one who elects to take advantage of it must set forth in his petition for relief all of the constitutional violations which he claims occurred at his...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Ragen
...from testing his second conviction if he filed in time — as he did his petition involving the kidnapping conviction. People v. Lewis, 1954, 2 Ill.2d 328, 118 N.E.2d 259. If by "Novotny," relator's counsel was referring to Judge Evans' opinion in Novotny v. Ragen, 7 Cir., 1937, 88 F.2d 72 th......
-
Glenn v. People
...the crime is foreign to the inquiry and becomes pertinent only when the accused is placed on trial for the alleged crime. People v. Lewis, 2 Ill.2d 328, 118 N.E.2d 259; People v. Gavrilovich, 265 Ill. 11, 106 N.E. 521. The defense of insanity at the time of the commission of the crime may b......
-
People v. Burson
...the time of trial is raised, the issue presented is whether the defendant has the capacity to make a rational defense. People v. Lewis, 2 Ill.2d 328, 331, 118 N.E.2d 259; 44 C.J.S. Insane Persons § 124, p. 282. He should be capable of understanding the nature and object of the proceedings a......
-
Gray v. Greer
...is waived as to any subsequent post-conviction petition. People v. Barber, 51 Ill.2d 268, 281 N.E.2d 676 (1972); People v. Lewis, 2 Ill.2d 328, 330-31, 118 N.E.2d 259 (1954); People v. Weaver, 60 Ill.App.3d 510, 17 Ill.Dec. 961, 377 N.E.2d 151 (1978). Although petitioner could not have rais......