TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

People v. McNeal

The People of the State of Illinois v. James W. McNeal

People v. McNeal, 289 N.E.2d 193 (Ill. App. Ct. 1972)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Appellate Court of Illinois · State Appellate Courts
Decided
October 24, 1972
Docket
No. 55546
Judges
Schwartz
Citations
289 N.E.2d 1938 Ill. App. 3d 1091972 Ill. App. LEXIS 1971

Opinion of the Court — Schwartz

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Mr. JUSTICE SCHWARTZ delivered the opinion of the court:

The defendant was found guilty at a bench trial of the offense of aggravated battery, and was sentenced to serve a term of one to three years in the penitentiary. The sole issue raised by this appeal is whether defendant was proved guüty beyond a reasonable doubt.

The evidence shows that on June 7, 1969, Lillian Lawrence was shot in the left elbow by a shotgun fired by defendant. Defendant sought to prove that the gun — which had no stock or safety — discharged accidentally when he puUed it to frighten Mrs. Lawrence who, he claims, was accosting him with a knife. Three witnesses, all of whom were friends of defendant, testified for the defense, and there were many inconsistencies in then testimony. Each one related that Mrs. Lawrence went after the defendant with a knife. However, there was disagreement in the testimony as to when Mrs. Lawrence first brandished the knife, whether she held it in a manner which would allow her to make downward stabbing motions, and whether defendant had pushed her to the ground before pulling the gun on her.

On the other hand, Mrs. Lawrence was the only witness for the State. She testified that she never pulled a knife on the defendant and that his actions were caused by her refusal to go home with him. Her testimony was not shaken on cross-examination.

The trial judge was in a superior position to evaluate the credibility and demeanor of the witnesses, and his findings of fact should not be disturbed on appeal unless palpably erroneous. We find no such error in this case.

This opinion is filed and the case disposed of in accordance with Supreme Court Rule 23. Ill. Rev. Stat. 1972, ch. 110A, par. 23.

Judgment affirmed.

STAMOS, P. J., and LEIGHTON, J., concur.

How later courts describe this case

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

1975: 11977: 119752026peak 1975 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. People v. Coogler340 N.E.2d 623 (Ill. App. Ct. 1975)
  2. People v. Carroll365 N.E.2d 1352 (Ill. App. Ct. 1977)

Most recent

  1. People v. Carroll365 N.E.2d 1352 (Ill. App. Ct. 1977)
  2. People v. Coogler340 N.E.2d 623 (Ill. App. Ct. 1975)

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 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

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