People v. Tucker

Decision Date26 January 1971
Docket NumberGen. No. 55167
Citation131 Ill.App.2d 598,268 N.E.2d 191
PartiesPEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jefferson B. TUCKER, Defendant-Appellant.
CourtUnited States Appellate Court of Illinois

Edward V. Hanrahan, State's Atty., County of Cook, Chicago, Robert A. Novelle, Martin Moltz, Asst. State's Attys., of counsel, for appellant.

Howard T. Savage, Chicago, for appellee.

STAMOS, Justice.

A jury found defendant guilty of driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor. He was fined $100.00 and his driver's license was revoked. Defendant appeals from the judgment on the verdict and initially contends that the complaint fails to charge a violation of law.

The complaint charged that defendant drove a motor vehicle upon a public highway in violation of Section 47 of the Uniform Act Regulating Traffic on Highways, Ill.Rev.Stat., ch. 95 1/2, § 144 (1965) by 'driving under the influence.'

In People v. Stringfield, 37 Ill.App.2d 344, 346, 185 N.E.2d 381, 383 (1962) this court stated:

'This section of the Uniform Act Regulating Traffic on Highways (Ill.Rev.Stats. (1961), ch. 95 1/2, sec. 144) states that it is unlawful for any person who is under the influence of intoxicating liquor or narcotic drugs to drive any vehicle within this state. 'Driving under the influence' does not describe either of these offenses.'

This court further stated at page 348, 185 N.E.2d at 383:

'The information was void and the conviction must be reversed.'

The People move that this court allow an amendment of the complaint by furnishing the phrase 'of intoxicating liquor,' and for authority cite People v. Sirinsky, Ill., 265 N.E.2d 505, 1970. In Sirinsky, the court observed that the caption of the complaint was amended in this court on oral argument to reflect that the People of the State of Illinois, rather than the Municipality of Evanston was the complainant. In the case at bar the sought after amendment pertains to a substantive rather than formal amendment. In People v. Billingsley, 67 Ill.App.2d 292, 213 N.E.2d 765 (1966) this court expressed language pertinent to the case at bar. At page 301, 213 N.E.2d at page 770, we said:

Section 111--5 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Ill.Rev.Stat.1963, Chap. 38, par. 111--5) authorizes amendment at anytime because of formal, but not substantive defects in an indictment, information or complaint. See People v. Hall, 55 Ill.App.2d 255, 259, 204 N.E.2d 473 (4th Dist. 1964). However, the complaint in the case at bar was defective in a substantive matter in that it did not allege a criminal offense. It was not...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • People v. Dunskus
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • July 26, 1996
    ...even if defendant does not claim prejudice. Utt, 122 Ill.App.3d at 275, 77 Ill.Dec. 840, 461 N.E.2d 463; accord People v. Tucker, 131 Ill.App.2d 598, 268 N.E.2d 191 (1971). We decline to follow the holdings in Utt and Tucker, as we conclude that they mischaracterize the law. Illinois courts......
  • People v. Tellez-Valencia
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • November 18, 1999
    ...it did not state an offense. Johnson, 43 Ill.App.3d at 561, 2 Ill.Dec. 427, 357 N.E.2d 594. See also, e.g., People v. Tucker, 131 Ill.App.2d 598, 599, 268 N.E.2d 191 (1971) (complaint for driving under the influence of intoxicating liquor was defective for leaving out the phrase "of intoxic......
  • People v. Leach, Gen. No. 54922
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • January 25, 1972
    ...a conviction. People v. Billingsley, Supra. Where a conviction rests on such a complaint, we will reverse without remand. People v. Tucker, Ill.App., 268 N.E.2d 191. II. The Resisting or Obstructing The complaint which purported to charge defendant with resisting or obstructing a peace offi......
  • People v. McClurg, 4-89-0692
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • March 8, 1990
    ...intended to permit the State to vivify a void charge." (Heard, 47 Ill.2d at 505, 266 N.E.2d at 343.) In People v. Tucker (1971), 131 Ill.App.2d 598, 598-99, 268 N.E.2d 191, 191-92, the following decision was "A jury found defendant guilty of driving a motor vehicle while under the influence......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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