Wray v. People of State
| Decision Date | 30 September 1875 |
| Citation | 78 Ill. 212,1875 WL 8455 |
| Parties | WILLIAM WRAYv.THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
WRIT OF ERROR to the Criminal Court of Cook county; the Hon. HENRY BOOTH, Judge, presiding.
Messrs. E. W. & W. W. EVANS, for the plaintiff in error.
The plaintiff in error, having been indicted at the May term, 1875, of the Criminal Court of Cook county, was brought to trial on the 25th of June succeeding, and the jury failed to agree, so that he was remanded to jail, where he has since remained. The charge was burglary, and, previous to this trial, he had employed and paid counsel, who conducted his case on that trial. The criminating circumstance against him, solely relied upon by the prosecution, was the fact of a coat stolen from the house which had been burglariously entered, having been found in his possession, together with a satchel containing burglar's implements, the next morning after the burglary.
On the 15th of July following the former trial, by order of court, the prisoner was brought into court, and there informed by the State's Attorney that prisoner's counsel had abandoned his case. The State's Attorney then had the cause set for trial, in prisoner's presence, for the next day, that being the 16th.
The accused had relied upon his counsel to prepare his case for a second trial, and to make his defense for him, and had, before the time mentioned, received no notice that his counsel had abandoned his case. Learning the fact, he, however, managed to have a subpœna issued for his witnesses, and, on the evening of the 15th, obtained other counsel, but, owing to the shortness of the time, the witnesses, although residing in the city, but being laborers, could not be found in time for the trial set for the 16th. Ascertaining this fact, he caused an affidavit to be prepared, setting forth substantially the circumstances above detailed upon the question of diligence, the names, residence and occupation of the several witnesses, their absence without his fault, the facts he expected to prove by each, and, upon such affidavit, made a motion for a continuance. The motion was overruled, and the matter preserved by bill of exceptions. The trial proceeded. The accused was convicted, and sentenced to five years in the penitentiary. He brings the record to this court on error, and assigns for error the overruling of the motion for continuance...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hollywood v. State
... ... practically denied his constitutional right to the assistance ... of counsel. ( State v. Pool, 23 So. 503; Dunn v ... People, 109 Ill. 635; Wray v. People, 78 Ill ... 212; Conley v. People, 80 Ill. 236; State v ... Simpson, 38 La. Ann. 24; State v. Ferris, 16 ... ...
-
Walker v. State
...to deny his motion for a continuance and to force him into trial. 9 Cyc. 188; Id. 96; 71 Ga. 481; 38 Ga. 50; 29 Ga. 271; 80 Ill. 236; 78 Ill. 212; 100 Ky. 194; 34 La.Ann. 100; 1 Bay (S. C.) 1; 53 S.W. 623; 14 Tex.App. 129; 14 Cent. Dig. Tit. "Criminal Law," § 1316; 3 Am. & Eng. Enc. of Law,......
-
Frieze v. the People
...the requirements of the statute and the evidence being shown to be material, the court should have granted a continuance, cited Wray v. The People, 78 Ill. 212; Cawley v. The People, 80 Ill. 236; Sprague v. Heaps, 7 Bradwell, 447; Switzer v. Lottenville, 4 Bradwell, 219. As to the practice ......
-
Stirling v. State
... ... show an abuse of this discretion that appellant courts are ... justified in interfering. Quayle v. State, ... 19 Ariz. 91, 165 P. 331; People v. Collins, ... 195 Cal. 325, 233 P. 97. The question presented, therefore, ... is whether the court in denying the motion under the ... right." State v. Simpson, 38 La. Ann ... 23; State v. Horn, 34 La. Ann. 100; ... Wray v. People, 78 Ill. 212; State ... v. Mizis, 48 Or. 165, 85 P. 611, 86 P. 361; ... Reliford v. State, 140 Ga. 777, 79 S.E ... 1128; 16 C.J. 483, ... ...