People v. McTush, 52843

CourtSupreme Court of Illinois
Citation43 Ill.Dec. 728,410 N.E.2d 861,81 Ill.2d 513
Docket NumberNo. 52843,52843
Parties, 43 Ill.Dec. 728 The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Appellant, v. John McTUSH, Appellee.
Decision Date15 September 1980

Page 861

410 N.E.2d 861
81 Ill.2d 513, 43 Ill.Dec. 728
The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Appellant,
John McTUSH, Appellee.
No. 52843.
Supreme Court of Illinois.
Sept. 15, 1980.

[81 Ill.2d 514]

Page 862

[43 Ill.Dec. 729] William J. Scott, Atty. Gen., Chicago, and Bernard Carey, State's Atty., Chicago (Donald B. Mackay and Melbourne A. Noel, Jr., Asst. Attys. Gen., and Marcia B. Orr and Paul C. Gridelli, Asst. State's Attys., Chicago, of counsel), for the People.

[81 Ill.2d 515] Ralph Ruebner, Deputy State Appellate Defender, Chicago (Gary Jay Ravitz, Asst. State Appellate Defender, Chicago, of counsel), for appellee.

CLARK, Justice:

The defendant, John McTush, was convicted of murder and armed robbery and burglary on October 19, 1977, by a jury in the circuit court of Cook County. Lonzell Stone, a codefendant, was tried without a jury contemporaneously and was also found guilty "in manner and form as charged in the indictment." After a hearing in aggravation and mitigation, McTush was sentenced to a term of 60 to 90 years' imprisonment and Stone was sentenced to a term of 25 to 50 years. On appeal to the appellate court (78 Ill.App.3d 603, 34 Ill.Dec. 7, 397 N.E.2d 463), the convictions of McTush were vacated and the cause remanded for an evidentiary hearing regarding the existence of an independent origin for a witness' in-court identification of McTush. Stone's conviction for armed robbery was reversed, his remaining convictions were affirmed, his sentence was vacated, and the cause was remanded for resentencing. The State appealed from the appellate court's judgment. We granted its petition for leave to appeal. (73 Ill.2d R. 315(a).) Only the validity of McTush's convictions is involved in this appeal.

On February 20, 1976, two men were observed entering the Kar-Life Battery Station at 6959 South Ashland Avenue in Chicago. According to the testimony of Terrence Watson, who was 11 years old at the time of the occurrence, he saw David Thomas, an employee of the battery shop, strike McTush in the mouth. McTush then shot Thomas four or five times and removed what was circumstantially proved at trial to be the shop's cash receipts from Thomas' jacket pocket. Terrence further

Page 863

[43 Ill.Dec. 730] testified that the other man, later identified as Lonzell [81 Ill.2d 516] Stone, went to the rear of the shop, out of his line of sight. Moments later Terrence heard more gunshots. Police officers who later searched the shop found the body of Dennis Harrison in the rear of the shop. He had been shot two times. As the men turned to come out of the shop toward their car, they looked directly at Terrence. Terrence then ran east on 70th Street toward Justine Avenue in a direction away from his home. After the men drove away, Terrence went home. Terrence later testified at trial that he saw the two men drive away in a black and brown Oldsmobile Delta 88 with a dent in the right fender. Terrence's mother, Mrs. Ira May Watson, looking from her kitchen window on the second floor of an apartment building adjacent to the battery shop, observed two men leave the shop and noticed that one of the men "strongly resembled" McTush.

On March 18, 1976, Terrence and his mother viewed a lineup, consisting of five black males of approximately equal height. One of the members of the lineup was McTush. Stone was not in the lineup. Neither Terrence Watson nor his mother identified any of the members of the lineup as a perpetrator of the offenses at the battery shop.

Subsequently, on May 24, 1976, shortly before testifying before the grand jury, Terrence and his mother were interviewed by an assistant State's Attorney. While his mother waited in another room, Terrence was shown a photograph of a separate lineup conducted on February 21, 1976. Terrence identified Stone from the photograph. McTush had not participated in that lineup. Terrence was then shown six photographs of various persons. Upon viewing the six photographs, Terrence indicated McTush as the man who had been with Stone on February 20, 1976. He also said that he had observed this same man in the lineup conducted on March 18, 1976. Mrs. Watson was unable to make a positive identification but she stated that [81 Ill.2d 517] McTush "strongly resembled" the man in the gray coat she witnessed leaving the battery shop.

At a hearing on a motion to suppress Terrence's out-of-court identifications of Stone and McTush, the trial court granted the motion as to the May 24, 1976, identification of McTush on the ground that it was impermissibly suggestive. The court said, however, that if evidence of an independent origin for the identification, apart from the identification made May 24, 1976, could be adduced, then Terrence could subsequently make an in-court identification of McTush. The court requested that defense counsel attempt to establish that there existed an independent origin for Terrence Watson's identification of McTush. The defense then called Terrence Watson and the following exchange occurred:

"Q. (MR. DEUTSCH) Okay. Now, what happened when you looked in that window? What did you see?

A. Well, I seen David Thomas hit McTush. I seen this man hit McTush in the mouth.

Q. Now, you seen David Thomas hit McTush in the mouth. Who's David Thomas?

A. The man that used to work in the battery shop.

Q. And when you saw how did you know it was McTush?

A. He used to sit around the house.

Q. What house?

A. Over there where Stone lives at.

Q. Where is that?

A. Across the street from my house.

Q. What else did you see when you looked in that window?

THE COURT: I don't have to go any further.

MR. ROBBINS: I will object, your Honor.

THE COURT: I don't have to go any further. I have heard enough. This witness is competent. He has an independent basis on which he can make a judgment and identification and I so hold.

I will prohibit the State from offering any evidence with reference to his photographic identification. You can [81 Ill.2d 518] cross-examine him in the presence of the jury and let the jury determine his believability

Page 864

[43 Ill.Dec. 731] with reference to his identification of your client.

The motion to suppress will be denied sustained in part and denied in part. All right. Step down, son."

Subsequently, at McTush's trial, the defendant, on cross-examination of Terrence, asked Terrence questions concerning his identification of Stone on May 24, 1976. On redirect examination, the State also asked Terrence several questions...

To continue reading

Request your trial
95 cases
  • People v. Bryant, 55723
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • January 24, 1983
    ...140.) When assessing reliability, this court has consistently examined the totality of the circumstances. (People v. McTush (1980), 81 Ill.2d 513, 43 Ill.Dec. 728, 410 N.E.2d 861; People v. Manion (1977), 67 Ill.2d 564, 10 Ill.Dec. 547, 367 N.E.2d 1313; People v. Williams (1975), 60 Ill.2d ......
  • People v. Lego, 59908
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • February 20, 1987
    ...suggestive pretrial identification procedures and their possible taint upon later in-court identification. (People v. McTush (1980), 81 Ill.2d 513, 43 Ill.Dec. 728, 410 N.E.2d 861; People v. Lee (1973), 54 Ill.2d 111, 295 N.E.2d 449; People v. Blumenshine (1969), 42 Ill.2d 508, 250 N.E.2d 1......
  • People v. Garcia, 54329
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • June 17, 1983
    ...unless the State is able to show by clear and convincing evidence an independent basis of reliability. (People v. McTush (1980), 81 Ill.2d 513, 520, 43 Ill.Dec. 728, 410 N.E.2d 861; People v. Blumenshine (1969), 42 Ill.2d 508, 511, 250 N.E.2d 152; See People v. Bryant (1983), 94 Ill.2d 514,......
  • People v. Jackson, 1-01-3551.
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • May 17, 2004
    ...identify the defendant on a prior occasion, and the witnesses' acquaintance with the defendant prior to the crime. See People v. McTush, 81 Ill.2d 513, 521, 43 Ill.Dec. 728, 410 N.E.2d 861 (1980); People v. Taylor, 163 Ill.App.3d 346, 357, 114 Ill.Dec. 494, 516 N.E.2d 649 (1987); People v. ......
  • 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