People v. Richards, 77-811

CourtUnited States Appellate Court of Illinois
Writing for the CourtROMITI; JIGANTI, P. J., and LINN
Citation28 Ill.Dec. 104,71 Ill.App.3d 581,390 N.E.2d 86
Parties, 28 Ill.Dec. 104 The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kenneth J. RICHARDS, Defendant-Appellant.
Docket NumberNo. 77-811,77-811
Decision Date26 April 1979

Page 86

390 N.E.2d 86
71 Ill.App.3d 581, 28 Ill.Dec. 104
The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee,
Kenneth J. RICHARDS, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 77-811.
Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, Fourth Division.
April 26, 1979.

[71 Ill.App.3d 582]

Page 87

[28 Ill.Dec. 105] James J. Doherty, Public Defender of Cook County (John McNamara and Suzanne M. Xinos, Asst. Public Defenders, of counsel), for defendant-appellant.

Bernard Carey, State's Atty. of Cook County (Lee T. Hettinger and Paul C. Gridelli, Asst. State's Attys., of counsel), for plaintiff-appellee.

ROMITI, Justice:

Defendant Kenneth Richards appeals from his conviction for aggravated battery. We consider only his claim that the trial court abused its discretion in twice extending the term within which the defendant was to be brought to trial. Because we agree with this contention we reverse defendant's conviction.

The running of defendant's term was tolled on June 6, 1976 when he missed a court appearance while on bond. The term began anew, under the provision of the Speedy Trial Act then in effect (Ill.Rev.Stat.1975, ch. 38, par. 103-5(f)), when defendant was taken into custody on the resulting bond forfeiture warrant on July 24, 1976. He remained in custody until his trial began on December 8, 1976. During that period no delays were attributable to him.

On November 4, 1976 the State requested a continuance beyond the scheduled November 17, 1976 trial date. The request was based on the representation of the complaining witness, Denise Richards (defendant's sister-in-law), that she had to attend a job-training seminar in Wausau, Wisconsin for two weeks beginning on November 7, 1976 after which she would also have to undergo training at her job site in River Forest, Illinois for two additional weeks. She indicated that if she failed to attend the seminar she would lose her job. But although the State requested this continuance, they also informed the court they were ready to proceed to trial the same day if necessary. Over defendant's objection the court granted an extension to December 7, 1976. On that date the complainant was late in coming to court. Before her arrival defendant moved for dismissal under the 4-Term Act, but the court indicated its intention to extend the term one additional day because other matters were "on trial." Later that day the witness appeared, explaining that her car had "stopped." Defendant and the State answered ready for trial but the [71 Ill.App.3d 583] court, apparently on its own motion, continued the cause for one day. Defendant's motion for a speedy trial dismissal was denied that day and again on December 8 when he renewed the motion. Trial began with the selection of the jury on December 8, 1976. (People v. Williams (1974), 59 Ill.2d 402, 320 N.E.2d 849.) Thus, defendant's trial began 137 days after he was taken into custody, seventeen days beyond the time within which the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • People v. Richards, 52167
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • September 15, 1980
    ...on the ground that the trial court had abused discretion by twice extending the trial date beyond the statutory term of 120 days. (71 Ill.App.3d 581, 28 Ill.Dec. 104, 390 N.E.2d 86.) We granted the People's petition for leave to appeal. 73 Ill.2d R. Page 835 [43 Ill.Dec. 702] The record sho......
  • People v. Clark, 15671
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • August 20, 1980
    ...where the State could make a strong and sympathetic claim of reliance the argument goes undiscussed (e. g., People v. Richards (1979), 71 Ill.App.3d 581, 390 N.E.2d 86, 28 Ill.Dec. 104); the courts look only for delay attributable to the defendant in deciding whether he is entitled to disch......
  • Lane, In Interest of, 77-545
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • April 26, 1979
    ...with precision the exact nature of the excluded expert testimony (People v. Hahn (1976), 39 Ill.App.3d 969, 350 N.E.2d 839), or Page 86 [28 Ill.Dec. 104] was faced with no indication of the nature of the testimony (People v. Warren (1975), 32 Ill.App.3d 218, 336 N.E.2d 557), we have no diff......
  • People v. Flowers, 79-1157
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • May 6, 1980 extension "it will protect this constitutional right by reversing a resulting conviction." People v. Richards (1st Dist. 1979), 71 Ill.App.3d 581, 583, 28 Ill.Dec. 104, 106, 390 N.E.2d 86, This court found facts insufficient to justify an extension in People v. Shannon, supra. The trial ......

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