Thompson v. People
| Decision Date | 20 November 1947 |
| Docket Number | No. 30209.,30209. |
| Citation | 75 N.E.2d 767,398 Ill. 366 |
| Parties | THOMPSON v. PEOPLE. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Circuit Court, Stephenson County; Harry E. Wheat, judge.
Charles J. Thompson was convicted of armed robbery, and he appeals from a judgment dismissing his petition in the nature of a motion for a writ of error coram nobis.
Affirmed.
Charles J. Thompson, pro se.
George F. Barrett, Atty. Gen. (Robert J. Ellis, State's Atty., of Freeport, of counsel), for appellee.
This is an appeal from a judgment of the circuit court of Stephenson County, dismissing appellant's petition in the nature of a motion for a writ of error coram nobis. Appellant was convicted of the crime of armed robbery in 1943 and sentenced to the penitentiary for one year to life. The criminal case was before this court on writ of error in People v. Thompson, 396 Ill. 175, 71 N.E.2d 172, and the judgment of conviction affirmed. Sentence was pronounced June 21, 1943. The present petition was filed in August, 1945.
It is alleged in the petition that counsel which the court appointed to defend appellant in the criminal action was incompetent, and that by reason of such incompetency he was sentenced to the penitentiary on a verdict which was not supported by the evidence; that certain witnesses testified fraudulently on the trial; that he had evidence to establish an alibi, which his counsel by reason of incompetency did not present, and that the court erred in not appointing counsel selected by appellant.
The writ of error coram nobis as known at the common law has been abolished. The errors which could have been corrected by the ancient writ may now be corrected by motion filed in the court in which the error was committed, under section 72 of the Civil Practice Act, Ill.Rev.Stat. 1947, c. 110, s 196. The function of a writ of error coram nobis was to bring the attention of the court to, and obtain relief from, errors of fact, such as death of either party pending the suit and before judgment therein, or infancy, where the party was not properly represented by guardian or coverture, where the common-law disability still existed, or a valid defense existing in the facts of the case but which, without negligence on the part of the defendant, was not made either through duress or fraud or excusable mistake, and these facts not appearing on the face of the record must be such as, if known in time, would have prevented rendition and entry of the judgment. People v. Bruno, 346 Ill. 449, 179 N.E. 129;People ex rel O'Connell v. Noonan, 276 Ill. 430, 114 N.E. 928.
This is an appropriate remedy in criminal cases to set aside a conviction obtained by duress or fraud, or where, by some excusable mistake or ignorance of the accused,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Jayne
...to warrant relief it is subject to a motion to dismiss. (Glenn v. People (1956), 9 Ill.2d 335, 137 N.E.2d 336; Thompson v. People (1947), 398 Ill. 366, 75 N.E.2d 767.) While it is true that in ruling on a motion to dismiss a Section 72 petition all well-pleaded facts are to be treated as ad......
-
Glenn v. People
...or shows on its face that the petitioner is not entitled to the relief sought, it is subject to a motion to dismiss. Thompson v. People, 398 Ill. 366, 75 N.E.2d 767. A motion to dismiss a motion in the nature of a writ of error coram nobis admits the facts well pleaded just as in any civil ......
- Brandt v. Phipps
-
Withers v. People
...by a motion to dismiss. People v. Lewis, 22 Ill.2d 68, 174 N.E.2d 197; Glenn v. People, 9 Ill.2d 335, 137 N.E.2d 336; Thompson v. People, 398 Ill. 366, 75 N.E.2d 767. All facts well pleaded are, of course, admitted for the purpose of determining the legal sufficiency. Schroers v. People, 39......