People v. Tierney

• Court: Illinois Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: HAND
• Citation: People v. Tierney, 250 Ill. 515, 95 N.E. 447 (Ill. 1911)
• Decision Date: 20 June 1911
• Parties: PEOPLE v. TIERNEY.

250 Ill. 515

95 N.E. 447

PEOPLE

v.TIERNEY.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

June 20, 1911.

Error to Criminal Court, Cook County; George Kersten, Judge.

John Tierney was convicted of robbery, and brings error. Affirmed.

Charles E. Erbstein, for plaintiff in error.

W. H. Stead, Atty. Gen., John E. W. Wayman, State's, Atty., and Fred H. Hand (George Guenther, of counsel), for the People.

HAND, J.

The grand jury of Cook county, at the February term, 1909, returned into the criminal court of said county an indictment containing four counts, charging John Tierney, Joseph Brocki, and John Rudinek with the crime of robbery. A plea of not quilty was entered and a conviction upon a trial before a jury was had, and the defendants were sentenced to the penitentiary for an indeterminate period. John Tierney has alone sued out a writ of error.

No bill of exceptions has been incorporated into the record, and but two reasons are urged in this court as grounds of reversal: (1) That it does not appear from the record that the plaintiff in error was arraigned; and (2) that the verdict returned by the jury is not sufficient to support the judgment.

The first count of the indictment charged that the plaintiff in error and Joseph Brocki and John Rudinek on the 19th day of January, 1909, in the county of Cook, committed the crime of robbery by feloniously and violently taking from the person of one Elizabeth Borzek certain moneys of the value of $48. The second count charged that the plaintiff in error was indicted on the 1st day of November, 1897, for the crime of robbery in Cook county by before that date feloniously and violently taking from the person of one August Freund a certain watch and other personal property; that at the time of the robbery plaintiff in error was armed with a revolver with intent to take the life of August Freund if resisted; and that certain confederates, who were armed, were present to aid and abet in the robbery, and that the plaintiff in error was convicted of such offense and was sentenced to the penitentiary, upon such conviction, for an indeterminate period. The count also charged the same robbery of Elizabeth Borzek charged in the first count of the indictment, and that at the time of such robbery the plaintiff in error and Joseph Brocki and John Rudinek were armed with revolvers, with the intent, if Elizabeth Borzek resisted, to maim or kill her. The third and fourth counts of the indictment charge former convictions against Joseph Brocki and John Rudinek and the robbery of Elizabeth Borzek, but as Joseph Brocki and John Rudinek are not before this court further reference need not be made to the third and fourth counts of the indictment.

On the 9th day of February, 1909, the following order was entered of record in said cause: ‘The People of the State of Illinois vs. John Tierney, (Impleaded)-Indictment for robbery, etc.-90,343.-This day come the said people, by John E. W. Wayman, state's attorney, and the said defendant, as well in his own proper person as by his counsel, also comes; and he having been furnished with a copy of the indictment in this cause and lists of the names of the witnesses and jurors, and he being now here duly arraigned and forthwith demanded of and concerning the crime alleged against him in said indictment how he will acquit himself thereof, for a plea in that behalf he says that he is not guilty in manner and form as charged therein; and of this he puts himself upon the country and the said people do the like.’ Afterwards, on the 6th day of March, 1909, the following order was entered of record in the cause: ‘The People of the State of Illinois vs. John Tierney, Joseph Brocki, John Rudinek.-Indictment for robbery, etc.-90,343.-This day come the said people, by John E. W. Wayman, state's attorney, and the said defendants, as well in their own proper persons as by their counsel, also come; and also come the jurors of the jury aforesaid with a sealed verdict, and for their verdict say: ‘We, the jury, find the defendant John Tierney guilty of robbery in manner and form as charged in the indictment; and we further find, from the evidence, that at the time of committing said robbery he was armed with a certain dangerous weapon, to wit, a certain revolver, with the unlawful and felonious intent then and there, if resisted, then and there to kill and maim the person so robbed; and we further find, from the evidence, that the defendant John Tierney, at the time of committing the offense, had theretofore been convicted of robbery and had served a term in...