People v. Pamilio
| Decision Date | 05 April 1935 |
| Docket Number | No. 22811.,22811. |
| Citation | 359 Ill. 609,194 N.E. 926 |
| Parties | PEOPLE v. PAMILIO. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Error to Criminal Court, Cook County; Benjamin P. Epstein, Judge.
Tony Pamilio was convicted of robbery with a gun, and he brings error.
Affirmed.
Benjamin H. Vanderveld, of Chicago (Aaron M. Homel, of Chicago, of counsel), for plaintiff in error.
Otto Kerner, Atty. Gen., Thomas J. Courtney, State's Atty., of Chicago, and J. J. Neiger, of Springfield (Edward E. Wilson, Henry E. Seyfarth, and John T. Gallagher, all of Chicago, of counsel), for the People.
A jury in the criminal court of Cook county returned a verdict finding Tony Pamilio guilty of robbery with a gun. He had been indicted and tried with Victor Musso and William Burke for the robbery of George Pappas on July 19, 1933, in Chicago. The indictment contained a count charging Pamilio to be an habitual criminal. The jury found that he had been previously convicted of larceny, with a result that he was sentenced to prison for life. He brings the case here for review by writ of error.
It is claimed that the evidence afforded an insufficient foundation for the verdict. Pamilio cannot urge this on review, as his motion for a new trial is contained in the common-law record and not in the bill of exceptions. People v. Buckman, 357 Ill. 407, 192 N. E. 349. The motion for leave to supply this omission is denied, as a copy thereof was not served on opposing counsel in accordance with rule 49 of this court.
The indictment is complained of on the ground that the second count, relating to the Habitual Criminal Act (Smith-Hurd Ann. St. c. 38, §§ 602, 603), sets forth conclusions of the pleader as to a prior judgment of conviction. It is urged that this count should have set forth in haec verba the placita, showing what judge presided at the trial when the judgment was entered and that the court was in open session and legally constituted for the transaction of business. It appears, however, that Pamilio failed to attack the sufficiency of that count prior to trial by a motion to quash. This failure precludes him from raising that question by a motion in arrest of judgment. A contrary expression has been cited to us in the case of People v. Goldberg, 287 Ill. 238, 122 N. E. 530, wherein it was held that a motion in arrest of judgment opened the entire record for examination, reaching any defect apparent therein, but in the more recent case of People v. Glassberg, 326 Ill. 379, 158 N. E. 103, we held that under section 9 of division 11 of the Criminal Code (Smith-Hurd Ann. St. c. 38, § 719) all exceptions going merely to the form of the indictment should be taken before trial, and that no motion in arrest of judgment, or writ of error, will be sustained unless it affects the real merits of the offense charged. An attack upon allegations because they lack particularity is a technical one and should be taken advantage of by a motion to quash. Young v. People, 193 Ill. 236, 61 N. E. 1104. In People v. Garkus, 358 Ill. 106, 192 N. E. 653, it was contended that the indictment did not sufficiently describe the property stolen. We there here that Garkus was in no position to take advantage of this on review, as he had failed to enter a motion to quash and his motions for a new trial and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Cooper
...be supplied him. The insufficiency of the information as to any matter of form should be raised by a motion to quash. People v. Pamilio, 359 Ill. 609, 194 N.E. 926. It is contended that upon the defendant's pleading guilty it was the duty of the court, imposed by law, to inform the defendan......
-
People v. Meaderds
...of an indictment because they lack particularity is technical, and should be taken advantage of by motion to quash. People v. Pamilio, 359 Ill. 609, 194 N.E. 926; People v. Johnson, 392 Ill. 409, 64 N.E.2d 878. Moreover, the People are not required to plead evidence in the indictment, (Peop......
-
People v. Johnson
... ... Odell v. Flaningam, 347 Ill. 328, 179 N.E. 823. It is also the rule that when the court has jurisdiction of the subject matter an attack on the allegations of an information because they are not sufficiently specific should be taken advantage of by motion to quash. People v. Pamilio, 359 Ill. 609,194 N.E. 126. No such motion was made in this case.The judgment of the Appellate Court is right and is affirmed.Judgment ... ...
-
People v. White
... ... 205.) Green's own acknowledgment that he knew that White had committed the crime was the State's only direct evidence on this point. The defendant did not move for a severance, and he is now precluded from asserting that he was prejudiced by the admission of this evidence. People v. Pamilio, 359 Ill. 609, 612, 194 N.E. 926 ... The defendant contends, however, that 'without notice of the content of the alleged admissions, the defendant was precluded from arguing that justice and law required a [28 Ill.2d 27] severance.' But the defendant knew that Green had made a ... ...