People v. Twitty
| Decision Date | 18 January 1950 |
| Docket Number | No. 31191,31191 |
| Citation | 405 Ill. 60,89 N.E.2d 827 |
| Parties | PEOPLE v. TWITTY. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
Bennett Twitty, pro se.
Ivan A. Elliott, Attorney General, and Robert Canfield, State's Attorney, of Rockford (Dale F. Conde, of Rockford, and Harry L. Pate, of Tuscola, of counsel), for the People.
Plaintiff in error, Bennett Twitty, hereinafter named defendant, was tried and convicted in the circuit court of Winnebago County at the October term, 1947, of the crimes of rape and indecent liberties, and was sentenced to ten years in the penitentiary. He brings this writ of error upon the common-law record only. The cause was tried before a jury and no bill of exceptions was saved.
The error assigned is the refusal of the court to grant a new trial, and while other grounds are set forth in the formal motion, the only error argued is newly discovered evidence. This is presented to the court in the form of affidavits. We have held many times that affidavits are not a part of the common-law record in criminal cases. As late as the case of People v. Loftus, 400 Ill. 432, 81 N.E.2d 495, 497, we announced that 'when the review is had upon the common-law record, the sole matter only that may be considered by the court is error appearing upon the face of the record, and matters may not be added by argument, affidavit, or otherwise, to supply or expand the record.'
No question is raised as to the fairness of the trial or the conduct thereof by the court. Since the affidavits presented are no part of the record, this alleged error, under many authorities, is not open to review. People v. Reese, 355 Ill. 562, 189 N.E. 876; People v. Johns, 388 Ill. 212, 57 N.E.2d 895; People v. Montville, 393 Ill. 590, 66 N.E.2d 861; People v. Griffin, 397 Ill. 456, 74 N.E.2d 691.
While not before us, we might add we have examined the matter contained in the brief and argument of plaintiff in error, and find that even were it a part of a proper bill of exceptions, it would be wholly insufficient ground upon which to reverse the judgment.
The judgment of the circuit court of Winnebago County is accordingly affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Patel v. Illinois State Medical Soc.
... ... appeal where facts are disclosed which show that such a controversy does not exist, even though such facts do not appear in the record' "); People ex rel. Bernardi v. City of Highland Park, 121 Ill.2d 1, 6, 117 Ill.Dec. 155, 520 N.E.2d 316, 318 (1988) ("this court will dismiss an appeal as moot ... ...
-
People v. Johnson
...instructions, rulings on motions, and the like will not be considered. People v. Thompson, 413 Ill. 53, 107 N.E.2d 866; People v. Twitty, 405 Ill. 60, 89 N.E.2d 827; People v. Loftus, 400 Ill. 432, 81 N.E.2d 495; People v. Yetter, 386 Ill. 594, 54 N.E.2d 532. In order to obtain a review of ......
-
People v. McGrath
...to obtain counsel to defend against the charge. However, affidavits are not part of the common law record (People v. Twitty, 405 Ill. 60, 61, 89 N.E.2d 827 (1950)) and this Court is not authorized to consider statements, arguments or contentions Dehors the record. People v. Rogers, 26 Ill.2......
-
People v. Bonner
...leave of court. Since only matters of record will be considered on appeal, we will not consider this affidavit. See People v. Twitty (1950), 405 Ill. 60, 89 N.E.2d 827; People v. Peery (1967), 81 Ill.App.2d 372, 225 N.E.2d Defendant next contends that the trial court erred in sustaining the......