People v. Sheridan

• Decision Date: 24 June 1932
• Docket Number: No. 21206.,21206.
• Citation: 349 Ill. 202,181 N.E. 617
• Parties: PEOPLE v. SHERIDAN.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

349 Ill. 202

181 N.E. 617

PEOPLE

v.SHERIDAN.

No. 21206.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

June 24, 1932.

Error to Third Branch Appellate Court, First District, on Error to Criminal Court, Cook County; John P. McGoorty, Judge.

Affirmed.John David Sheridan, Jr., was adjudged guilty of criminal contempt of court, and he brings error.

Everett Jennings and W. W. Smith, both of Chicago, for plaintiff in error.

Oscar E. Carlstrom, Atty. Gen., John A. Swanson, State's Atty., of Chicago, and J. J. Neiger, of Springfield (Edward E. Wilson and Grenville Beardsley, both of Chicago, of counsel), for the People.

DUNCAN, J.

Plaintiff in error, John David Sheridan, Jr. (herein called defendant), was by an order of the criminal court of Cook county adjudged to be guilty of a direct criminal contempt of court and sentenced to confinement in the county jail of that county for ten days. The judgment of the criminal court was affirmed by the Appellate Court for the First District. A writ of error has been sued out of this court.

On October 20, 1930, the state's attorney of Cook county filed in the criminal court of that county a petition in which it was alleged that defendant appeared as a witness before the grand jury of that county on the 15th, 16th, and 17th days of October, 1930, and gave testimony ‘with reference to an inquiry then being conducted by said grand jury.’ The petition contained allegations of the matters testified to by defendant and the nature of his testimony on each of the three days. It was charged in the petition that he disregarded the questions propounded to him before the grand jury and gave wholly irresponsive, evasive, and untruthful answers; that it was apparent from the testimony given by him that his answers were so couched as to obstruct, hinder, and delay the investigation being conducted by the grand jury; that his testimony before the grand jury was material and pertinent to the inquiry being conducted by the grand jury with reference to the Coal Hikers Union, Local No. 701, the Chicago Coal Teamsters', Chauffeurs' and Helpers' Union, Local No. 704, and the Chicago Coal Dealers' and Helpers' Union, Local No. 707; and that his testimony, conduct, and behavior before the grand jury on said days were in open defiance of the administration of justice and wholly contemptuous of the grand jury and of the court.

On October 24, 1930, defendant appeared in court and moved to dismiss the petition because it was insufficient to charge him with contempt of court or to support any finding of contempt that might be made by the court. The motion to dismiss the petition was overruled. There was introduced in evidence a transcript of the proceedings of the grand jury and the testimony of defendant when he was before the grand jury on October 15, 16, and 17, 1930. He objected to the introduction of the transcript on the ground that the petition that had been filed was insufficient and that the evidence was irrelevant and immaterial but waived any objection that the transcript was not the best evidence of the proceedings before the grand jury. No other evidence was offered or introduced, and the court entered its order, in which, after reciting that defendant was present in open court in person and represented by counsel and finding that the grand jury was duly and legally impaneled, the court found that ‘on the 15th day of October, 1930, the defendant appeared before said grand jury in response to a subpoena of this court duly served upon him, was duly sworn to testify truthfully, and thereupon did testify and say, in substance and effect, that at no time was he ever directly or indirectly connected with the Chicago Coal Hikers Union, Local No. 701, or the Chicago Coal Dealers and Helpers Union, Local 707, and that he had never received any moneys, remuneration or compensation for services rendered by him from either of these unions or for any other purpose; that the defendant did further testify and say, in effect and substance, that he had no knowledge as to how the said Chicago Coal Hikers Union, Local No. 701, and Chicago Coal Dealers and Helpers Union, Local No. 707, was organized, and did not know whether or not said unions were connected in any way with the Chicago Coal Teamsters, Chauffeurs and Helpers Union, Local No. 704, by which he was employed as a clerk’; that ‘on the 16th day of October, 1930, the defendant again appeared before the said grand jury in response to a subpoena of this court duly served upon him, was duly sworn to testify truthfully, and thereupon did testify and say, in substance and effect, that he did not recall ever having received any check or checks made out to currency or to himself, either directly or indirectly, from one George Barker or signed by said George Barker, and did not recall ever having cashed a check or checks signed by said George Barker’; that ‘on the 17th day of October, 1930, the defendant again appeared before the said grand jury in response to a subpoena of this court duly served upon him, was duly sworn to testify truthfully, and did thereupon testify and say, in substance and effect, that he had been paid half of his wages of one hundred dollars ($100) per week, or fifty dollars ($50) per week, from the treasury of the Chicago Coal Hikers Union, Local No. 701, and that arrangements had been made for him to receive his pay in this manner from one Mr. Lynch; that he had also occupied the same office with the clerk in charge of the Chicago Coal Dealers and Helpers Union, Local No. 707, and that the clerk of said union, one Stanley Venesky, had been on the pay-roll of the Chicago Coal Teamsters, Chauffeurs and Helpers Union, Local No. 704, for which he, the defendant,...