People v. Patterson

• Decision Date: 22 December 1933
• Docket Number: No. 22089.,22089.
• Citation: 188 N.E. 417,354 Ill. 313
• Parties: PEOPLE v. PATTERSON.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

354 Ill. 313

188 N.E. 417

PEOPLE

v.PATTERSON.

No. 22089.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Dec. 22, 1933.

Error to Circuit Court, Sangamon County; Lawrence E. Stone, Judge.

Ted Patterson was convicted of robbery while armed with a gun, and he brings error.

Affirmed.

See, also, 350 Ill. 519, 183 N. E. 584.

Gerald G. Ginnaven, of Springfield, for plaintiff in error.

Otto Kerner, Atty. Gen., A. H. Greening, State's Atty., J. J. Neiger, and Thomas W. Hoopes, all of Springfield, for the People.

SHAW, Justice.

The plaintiff in error was indicted, tried, and convicted in the circuit court of Sangamon county on a charge of robbery while armed with a gun, and he sues out this writ of error to review that conviction.

Seven errors are assigned, in substance, as follows: (1) Denial of motion to suppress evidence; (2) overruling plea of former jeopardy; (3) denial of motion for a new trial; (4) denial of motion in arrest of judgment; (5) the claimed erroneous entry of judgment upon an indictment rendered by an unsworn grand jury; (6) the imposing of sentence of imprisonment in the Southern Illinois State Penitentiary upon an indictment claimed to have been returned by an unsworn grand jury; and (7) that the verdict of the jury is contrary to the law and the evidence. All of the errors assigned may be considered by us under three general headings: First, the matters pertaining to the grand jury; second, the matters pertaining to the suppression of evidence; and, third, the matters claimed as to double jeopardy.

All of the questions raised by the plaintiff in error in connection with the grand jury are completely and effectually answered by the additional abstract of record compiled by the people. The abstract furnished by the plaintiff in error failed to show all of the facts in connection with this point as the same fully appear upon the record. The additional abstract furnished by the people, and the record itself, fully and clearly show that a foreman was appointed for the grand jury, that he and the grand jury were both duly sworn according to law, and that the jury were committed to the custody of sworn officers. There is no error shown, and the argument is without support on the record.

The claim of double jeopardy presented by the plaintiff in error is entirely without merit. It appears from the record that he was tried once before upon this same charge in the circuit court of Sangamon county on April 24, 1933. In that trial evidence was heard, the jury were instructed and later returned with their verdict, whereupon the plaintiff in error told the court that he had heard that one of the jurors was under the age of twenty-one years. By leave of court the jury were examined and it was discovered that one of the jurors was only twenty years of age, whereupon the plaintiff in error moved that the juror be withdrawn, a mistrial declared, and a new trial ordered. This motion was allowed, and the trial now in question was had pursuant to the plaintiff in error's own motion. The point has been often decided by this court against the plaintiff in error's contention. People v. Peplos, 340 Ill. 27, 172 N. E. 54;People v. Washington, 342 Ill. 350, 174 N. E. 405;People v. Simos, 345 Ill. 226, 178 N. E. 188. We do not deem it necessary to multiply the citation of authorities upon a proposition so long and so firmly established.

The evidence in the record shows beyond a reasonable doubt that on the morning of November 26, 1930, the plaintiff in error, together with one McCoy and one Brown, held up the Rochester State Bank, in Rochester, Ill., securing something over $1,800 in silver and paper money. They entered the bank and at the points of their guns forced the cashier and assistant cashier of the bank to go into the back room and lie down on the floor. They later compelled the cashier, James Earl Bell, to open the cash safe for them, and when they left they forced him to go with them in their Ford car. During the robbery George Hessinger came into the bank and was compelled to join the others on the floor in the back room. All three of these witnesses positively identified the plaintiff in error, and their evidence was not controverted. When the cashier was taken from the bank he was compelled to get into a Ford car with the robbers and was carried by them to the edge of town where they told him to jump out, which he did. As he jumped from the car, another car, a Buick, driven by Charles Worthan, came along, and the cashier called to the driver of that car that there were robbers...