People v. Perri, No. 26907.
| Court | Supreme Court of Illinois |
| Writing for the Court | MURPHY |
| Citation | 381 Ill. 244,44 N.E.2d 857 |
| Parties | PEOPLE v. PERRI. |
| Docket Number | No. 26907. |
| Decision Date | 17 November 1942 |
381 Ill. 244
44 N.E.2d 857
PEOPLE
v.
PERRI.
No. 26907.
Supreme Court of Illinois.
Nov. 17, 1942.
Error to Criminal Court, Cook County; John A. Sbarbaro, Judge.
Nicoli Perri was convicted of murder, and he brings error.
Judgment affirmed.
[44 N.E.2d 857]
James M. Burke, of Chicago, for appellant.
George F. Barrett, Atty. Gen., and Thomas J. Courtney, State's Atty., of Chicago (Edward E. Wilson, John T. Gallagher, and Melvin S. Rembe, all of Chicago, of counsel), for the People.
MURPHY, Justice.
In a trial in the criminal court of Cook county, without a jury, plaintiff in error, Nicoli Perri, was found guilty of the murder of Carmela Rinaldi and committed to the Illinois State Penitentiary for fourteen years. He prosecutes this writ of error and as grounds for reversal urges that the evidence does not establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, that the court erred in
[44 N.E.2d 858]
refusing competent evidence offered by him and that incompetent evidence was admitted on behalf of the State.
The deceased, Rinaldi, and his partner, John Scorza, operated a grocery, delicatessen and restaurant at 763 South State street, Chicago. The dimensions of the room in which they conducted their business were 16 by 80 feet. It was divided into two rooms by a partition 30 feet from the front. The grocery and delicatessen business was conducted in the front room and the rear room was used to serve sandwiches and light lunches. The front room contained shelving, counters and a meat case.
Plaintiff in error came to the United States from Italy in 1931. In 1933 he entered the employment of the city of Chicago as a street sweeper and continued in that service until the day of the fatal shooting April 25, 1941. He had known Rinaldi and Scorza for several years prior to the homicide and kept his street-sweeper's uniform and other sweeper's paraphernalia in a shed to the rear of their store. At the time of the shooting, he had a radio and a bag containing a pistol and clothing in the back room of the store. He purchased grocery articles from the partnership and had some of his meals in their restaurant and was a frequent caller at the store.
On April 24, 1941, after eating his lunch, he engaged in a card game with deceased and Pasquale Farradi. A dispute arose in a short time and the game ended. Plaintiff in error charged Rinaldi with taking a nickel more than was coming to him from the game. Plaintiff in error left the store and returned for breakfast early the next morning. Rinaldi was not present at that time. A few minutes after 12 o'clock, noon, April 25, plaintiff in error returned to the store for his lunch. There is evidence which indicates that the argument of the night before was renewed. Rinaldi was shot about 12:30 and the evidence describing the events which preceded the shooting is in conflict. Plaintiff in error admits the homicide but claims it occurred in lawful self-defense.
John Scorza testified that when plaintiff in error entered the store, he was in the back room and that Rinaldi, Tom Stone and Dean Paron were present. He further testified that the plaintiff in error took his radio from the shelf and placed it in a shopping bag, stating he would not leave it there for Rinaldi, that later he heard plaintiff in error and Rinaldi in a heated argument in the front room, saying to each other in Italian ‘You no good, you no good;’ that he then heard five shots and saw plaintiff in error run out the back door. Scorza stated he then went to the front room and found Rinaldi behind a counter near the wall, shot and bleeding profusely; that no one except plaintiff in error and Rinaldi were in the front room at the time of the shooting, and at the time of the shooting plaintiff in error was on the opposite side of the counter from Rinaldi. He testified he found a butcher knife on the floor behind the counter near Rinaldi and that the knife was one customarily kept on the counter for cutting meat.
Tom Stone testified he was in the rear room eating his lunch when the shooting...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Cutty's-Gurnee, Inc., Bankruptcy No. 88 B 14750
...as to his interest and is charged with knowledge of the facts 133 BR 951 discoverable from such an inquiry or inspection. Miller, 381 Ill. at 244, 44 N.E.2d at 853; Burnex Oil Co. v. Floyd, 106 Ill. App.2d 16, 23, 245 N.E.2d 539, 544 (1st Dist.1969); In re Ehrlich, 59 B.R. 646, 650 Outside ......
-
State v. Schoolcraft, 19303
...has the discretion to make the determination on admissibility. E.g., State v. Butler, 207 Conn. 619, 543 A.2d 270 (1988); People v. Perri, 381 Ill. 244, 44 N.E.2d 857 (1942); People v. Malone, 180 Mich.App. 347, 447 N.W.2d 157 (1989); State v. Marco, 220 Neb. 96, 368 N.W.2d 470 (1985); Stat......
-
Eizerman v. Behn, Gen. No. 46438
...the testimony of the witness Sheffey given on the stand, and consequently were properly admissible for impeachment. People v. Perri, 381 Ill. 244, 44 N.E.2d 857. It is a well-settled rule of law that evidence which is competent for one purpose does not become incompetent because the jury mi......
-
People v. Ellis, 61194
...the alleged conversation; secondly, the witness must be asked whether he made a certain contrary statement at that time. People v. Perri, 381 Ill. 244, 44 N.E.2d 857; People v. Byers, 11 Ill.App.3d 277, 296 N.E.2d In the instant case, Harris was never questioned about any conversation he ha......