People v. Lindley

• Decision Date: 20 February 1918
• Docket Number: No. 11614.,11614.
• Citation: 118 N.E. 719,282 Ill. 377
• Parties: PEOPLE v. LINDLEY.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

282 Ill. 377

118 N.E. 719

PEOPLE

v.LINDLEY.

No. 11614.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Feb. 20, 1918.

Error to Criminal Court, Cook County; David M. Brothers, Judge.

Maud Lindley was convicted of larceny and receiving stolen property, and she brings error. Reversed and remanded.

Max Luster and Frank A. McDonnell, both of Chicago, for plaintiff in error.

Edward J. Brundage, Atty. Gen., and Maclay Hoyne, State's Atty., and Edward C. Fitch, both of Chicago (Daniel G. Ramsey and George C. Bliss, both of Chicago, of counsel), for the People.

FARMER, J.

Maud Lindley, a married woman, resides in the city of Chicago, where she keeps a rooming house. Her husband either conducts or works in a plumbing shop in Kokomo, Ind. Mrs. Lindley was indicted in the criminal court of Cook county in June, 1917, some of the counts of the indictment charging her with the larceny of an automobile on October 28, 1916, and others charging her with buying, receiving, and aiding in concealing an automobile that had been stolen from its owner, well knowing said property had been stolen. She was tried, convicted, and sentenced to the penitentiary by the judgment of the criminal court, and brings the case here for review by writ of error.

Benjamin F. Cartwright, residing at 3134 Franklin boulevard, in Chicago, was the owner of a Studebaker automobile, which he kept in his private garage on the premises where he resided. On or about October 28, 1916, it was stolen from the garage. It was found in May, 1917, in the garage of Ed. E. Hill, in Kokomo, Ind., where it had been stored by plaintiff in error. She explained her connection with and possession of the automobile in the following manner: She had formerly resided in and near Kokomo. While visiting there during the summer of 1916 a man giving his name as Edward Fields introduced himself to her, claiming he recognized her because he formerly lived there and used to deliver papers to her family when they resided on East Jackson street, in Kokomo. Along about November 1, 1916, Fields either called on plaintiff in error personally or called her by telephone and told her he was going to drive from Chicago to Kokomo the next day, and inquired if she did not wish to accompany him. She consented to do so, and the following day plaintiff in error and her brother went with Fields and another man in an automobile driven by Fields to Kokomo. After arriving there Fields later saw plaintiff in error and told her he had expected to receive $250 that day from some one in Kokomo,but did not get it, and was disturbed and disappointed. He offered to mortgage the car to plaintiff in error for the money, and after some negotiations she finally loaned him $200, taking a note and a chattel mortgage on the car, which he left in her possession. She stored it first with her sister, a few miles out in the country from Kokomo, but later had it brought in and placed in the garage of Pearl Miller until April 8, 1917, when she sold it to Tracy J. Taylor for $450. She testified she had previously received a letter from Fields, dated March 22, 1917, postmarked Columbus, Ohio, telling her he woudl be unable to repay the loan, and advising her to sell the car, but to try and get $500 for it. He advised her that Ed. Hill, of Kokomo, might be able to assist her, and said he would see plaintiff in error soon. The letter and envelope in which it was received were introduced in evidence. A few days before the sale to Taylor, who was employed in the store of Carson, Pirie, Scott & Co., plaintiff in error learned he desired to purchase a car, called on him at the store, and proposed to sell him the car she had in Kokomo. Taylor agreed to go with her to see the car, and they went to Kokomo, arriving there Sunday, April 8, 1917. Plaintiff in error asked $500 for the car, which Taylor declined to give, and a sale of it was finally made to Taylor for $450. One hundred dollars was paid in cash, and Taylor gave his check, dated eight days ahead, to plaintiff in error for $350, taking a receipt from plaintiff in error, in which she agreed to return the cash and check and take back the car if upon investigation it was found there should be any lien of any kind on the car. Before the check was cashed Taylor notified plaintiff in error that he was not satisfied with her title to the car, and requested the return to him of the cash and the check. He testified the car had been stolen, but it is not entirely clear that he told plaintiff in error that he had found it was a stolen car. He told her enough, at least, from which she would naturally infer that Fields did not own the car. The plaintiff in error returned to Taylor the money and his check, took the car back, and had it driven to Kokomo and stored in the garage of Ed. Hill until it was taken by the police officers, May 19, 1917.

The chattel mortgage given by Fields to secure his $200 note to plaintiff in error was prepared in the office of and acknowledged by Nora O'Neill, a lady notary public in the city of Kokomo, in the presence of plaintiff in error, and while, as she testified, the car stood in front of the building where the notary's office was. The chattel mortgage described a Studebaker seven-passenger touring car, 1917 model, serial No. 10731–I. The car stolen was, in fact a Studebaker seven-passenger touring car, 1916 model, serial No. 104568. During the progress of the trial counsel for plaintiff in error offered in evidence the note and chattel mortgage given plaintiff in error by Fields. No objection was made to the offer, and when counsel proposed to read them the court interrupted and directed plaintiff in error's counsel to show them to counse...