Wiseman v. Nierstheimer

• Court: Illinois Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: WILSON
• Citation: Wiseman v. Nierstheimer, 401 Ill. 260, 81 N.E.2d 900 (Ill. 1948)
• Decision Date: 11 November 1948
• Docket Number: No. 30626.,30626.
• Parties: PEOPLE ex rel. WISEMAN v. NIERSTHEIMER, Warden.

401 Ill. 260

81 N.E.2d 900

PEOPLE ex rel. WISEMAN

v.NIERSTHEIMER, Warden.

No. 30626.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Sept. 24, 1948.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 11, 1948.

Original habeas corpus proceeding by the People, on relation of Manuel M. Wiseman, on behalf of Charles Stewart Willis, against Walter Nierstheimer, Warden, to obtain the discharge of Charles Stewart Willis from the state penitentiary.

Petitioner remanded to custody of sheriff with directions.Manuel M. Wiseman, of Alton, James O. Monroe, Jr., of Collinsville, and Edward D. Groshong and Irving M. Wiseman, both of Alton, for petitioner.

George F. Barrett, Atty. Gen. (William C. Wines and James C. Murray, both of Chicago, of counsel), for respondent.

WILSON, Justice, delivered the opinion of the court:

By an original petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed in this court against Walter Nierstheimer, warden of the Illinois State Penitentiary at Menard, Manuel M. Wiseman, on behalf of Charles Stewart Willis, sought to obtain Willis's discharge from the penitentiary. The writ issued, the warden made a return, and a traverse in the nature of a demurrer was filed on behalf of Willis. The cause is submitted upon the record thus made.

From the petition and the warden's return to the writ, the following facts appear: On April 8, 1932, Charles Stewart Willis, then fifteen years of age, was adjudged feeble-minded by a decree of the county court of Jersey County and ordered committed to the Lincoln State School and Colony, at Lincoln, to remain in this institution under its supervision, custody, control and care, as provided by statute and in accordance with the rules of the institution, until further order of the court or until released therefrom by operation of law. The decree recites that the county court retains jurisdiction of the cause for the purpose of making such further or other orders for the welfare of Willis as may from time to time be found to be in accordance with the applicable statute. Willis was delivered to the superintendent of the Lincoln State School and Colony the following day, namely, April 9. Two days later, on April 11, the judge of the county court wrote a letter to the managing officer of the institution at Lincoln saying, ‘Chas. Willis was placed in your Institution on April 9, 1932, and from information received from Mr. S. P. Wright, State Visitor, and Miss Edna Zimmerman, Superintendent of Child Welfare, I am of the opinion that the place they have chosen at Decatur would be a more consistent place according to the Psychologist's report from the institute for Juvenile Research in Chicago. I have, therefore, this day rescinded the former order of commitment to your Institution and, if agreeable with you, I hereby order Mr. Wright to transfer this boy from your Institution to the Decatur Boys' Home as arranged by said Miss Edna Zimmerman.’ So far as the records of the county court of Jersey County disclose, the order of commitment entered on April 8, 1932, has never been rescinded, revoked or set aside. The only evidence tending to show whether the commitment was rescinded, revoked, or set aside is the letter dated April 11, 1932, signed by the county judge and directed to the managing officer of the Lincoln State School and Colony.

Pursuant to the letter described, Willis was taken from the custody of the Lincoln State School and Colony and delivered to the Boy's Opportunity Home at Decatur. Willis was returned to Jersey County on August 19, 1932, where he remained in a foster home financed by his foster mother. Subsequently, he left this home and went to Morgan County.

Two indictments returned in the circuit court of Morgan County on February 13, 1933, charged Willis with the murder of John Rapp and Harry L. Myers on December 28, 1932, by displacing a railroad track switch of the Wabash Railway Company. Willis, then sixteen years of age, on March 13, 1933, represented by counsel, waived a trial by jury, pleading guilty to each indictment and, after admonition as to his right and the consequences of his pleas of guilty, persisted in them. The pleas were accepted and defendant found guilty of murder in the manner and form as charged in the indictments. The attorney for Willis then made a motion in each cause seeking permission to offer testimony in mitigation of the sentence and of extenuating circumstances. The motions were allowed and the causes continued. By agreement of the parties, the trial judge appointed a commission to examine and report on the mental condition and intelligence of Willis. On April 13, 1933, defendant, by his attorney, offered evidence in mitigation of punishment and, after all the evidence for and against mitigation of punishment was heard, the cause was taken under advisement. The report of the commission and, also, the report of Dr. Paul Schroeder, State Criminologist, on the mental condition of Willis, were filed on the day last named. The report of the commission dated March 14, 1933, signed by Dr. Frank P. Norbury, medical director of the Norbury Sanitorium, Jacksonville, Dr. Joseph Marcovitch and Dr. Samuel N. Clark, states that Willis was examined on the day named; that the examination consisted of a complete examination of the bodily condition, including an investigation of the nervous system, also a determination of the degree of intelligence possessed by Willis, with consideration given to the question of whether any intercurrent mental disorder (psychosis) existed; that nothing was brought out in the physical examination to indicate any bodily disease which would interfere with the mental processes and that, in the neurological examination, nothing was found suggesting the presence of an organic involvement of the brain. The commission reported, further, that Willis was oriented; that he had a fair grasp of the immediate aspects of the situation, and no delusions, sense falsifications or emotional disturbance were indicated during the examination; that Willis spoke of having passed through two spells for which he had no memory; that it was demonstrated to one of the three examiners who saw him during one of the spells that he did know what he was doing at the time, although the spell evidently represented a period of emotional disturbance; that it was the considered judgment of the three members of the commission that neither of the two spells could be said to have indicated a period of insanity not a period of unconsciousness, and that the points mentioned led to the conclusion that Willis was not suffering from insanity. The commission stated that Willis was given a group intelligence test, commonly known as ‘The Stanford Revision of the Binet-Simon Tests,’ representing what is generally considered the most reliable group of tests employed for the purpose of determining whether intelligence is normal or retarded; that they found Willis graded twelve years which would give an intelligence quotient of 75; that the intelligence quotient is derived by dividing the mental age, as determined by the tests, by the actual age; that an intelligence quotient of 70 is ordinarily given as the dividing line between feeble-mindedness and those above this level; that ‘One has to add that one cannot say that there is a sharply dividing line, and the figure given should be considered as simply a convenient approximation;’ that, besides the intelligence quotient, the social behavior of the individual has to be considered; that, according to the behavior, one may say that some borderline cases need not be committed but may continue to live in the community at large, whereas, with asocial behavior added to a borderline condition, one feels the case is commitable; that Willis indicated a number of incidents ‘already known to the Court,’ indicating that he was anti-social or asocial, and that, with the emotional instability which had been brought out on some provocation and the low intelligence, rendered him a distinct menace to society. The commission concluded its report, ‘We feel that Charles Willis is a border line feeble-minded individual, who more than many other cases of low intelligence admits behavior which indicates the need for removing him from the community at large, and therefore our conclusions are that the said Charles Willis is a subject for permanent custodial care.’

Paul L. Schroeder, State Criminologist, wrote a long letter, dated April 5, 1933, to the judge of the circuit court of Morgan County certifying that he had examined Willis on the day named; that he was then in full contact with his surroundings, oriented in all spheres, discussed readily and freely the charge against him, recognized the seriousness of the offense, and understood the consequences of the punishmentwhich might be meted out to him; that there was evident, however, a failure to react adequately to this knowledge, failure to appreciate fully his situation in view of the possibility of punishment; that, in discussing his previous life, Willis admitted he had put fire to a barn on the home of his foster mother when eight years of age; that two years later, he lighted a garage in the city of Jerseyville; that, while at a children's home in Decatur, he cut his wrist with a razor blade, the scar of which was evident; that, while at the Soldiers' Home in Normal, he experienced a fainting attack following a disagreement with an older boy but remembered nothing of this, although examined at the time; that each of these instances was followed by intense desire for excitement, and that, after each of them, he had a feeling of relaxation, of well-being, and a subsequent horror at the damage which he had done. Dr. Schroeder added that Willis readily discussed the throwing of the switch resulting in the train wreck and death, stating that he felt compulsion to throw the switch; that at first he decided not to do it because, he said, ‘I realized I might be pinched for fooling with a railroad switch,’ but stated he...