TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

People v. Featherstone

The People of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Edmond K. Featherstone, Defendant-Appellant

People v. Featherstone, 318 N.E.2d 756 (Ill. App. Ct. 1974)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Appellate Court of Illinois · State Appellate Courts
Decided
November 6, 1974
Docket
No. 12111
Judges
Trapp
Citations
318 N.E.2d 75623 Ill. App. 3d 4921974 Ill. App. LEXIS 1872

Opinion — Trapp

Mr. PRESIDING JUSTICE TRAPP delivered the opinion of the court:

Defendant appeals from his conviction upon a jury verdict finding him .guilty of :“[d]riving while under the influence of liquor or narcotic drug, in the manner and form as charged in ■ the complaint.” A fine of $500 was imposed.

The complaint charged violation of section 11 — 501 of the Illinois Vehicle Code (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1971, ch 95%, § 11 — 501), in the language:

“(D)riving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or narcotic drug, * * * then and there being under the influence of intoxicating liquor or narcotic drug, ” * The conviction is reversed upon the authority of People v. Johnson, 16 Ill.App.3d 819 , 307 N.E.2d 159 , and People v. Smith, 15 Ill.App.3d 107 , 303 N.E.2d 508 . In Johnson, defendant pleaded guilty to charges in substantially identical language:

“In a single count complaint, defendant was charged with offenses provided for under separate paragraphs of the statute (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1971, ch. 95%, § 11 — 501(a) and (b)). Each paragraph charges disparate and alternative acts; each sets forth a different offense with differing necessary elements. As a result, we here : find that the complaint is ¡void for failure to set forth the nature and elements of the charge with certainty as required by both the federal constitution (amendment VI) and section 111 — 3(a) (3) of the Code.of Criminal Procedure (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1971, ch. 38, § 111 — 3(a) (3));. See People v. Heard, 47 Ill.2d 501, 504-505 [ 266 N.E.2d 340 ] (1970); * * *.’’ 16 Ill.App.3d 819, 820 .

The opinions in Johnson and Smith apply to the rule stated in People v. Heard, 47 Ill.2d 501 , 266 N.E.2d 340 .

The judgment is reversed.

..Reversed.

SIMKINS and KUNCE, JJ., Concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1984: 11985: 11986: 119842026peak 1984 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. People v. Atwell473 N.E.2d 89 (Ill. App. Ct. 1984)
  2. People v. Sergey485 N.E.2d 506 (Ill. App. Ct. 1985)
  3. People v. Sikes491 N.E.2d 168 (Ill. App. Ct. 1986)

Most recent

  1. People v. Sikes491 N.E.2d 168 (Ill. App. Ct. 1986)
  2. People v. Sergey485 N.E.2d 506 (Ill. App. Ct. 1985)
  3. People v. Atwell473 N.E.2d 89 (Ill. App. Ct. 1984)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

DepthCaseCited by
People v. Heard, 266 N.E.2d 340 (Ill. 1970) 80
People v. Johnson, 307 N.E.2d 159 (Ill. App. Ct. 1974) 5
People v. Smith, 303 N.E.2d 503 (Ill. App. Ct. 1973) 2

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list