People v. Mendoza

Illinois Supreme Court

People v. Mendoza

181 N.E.2d 96, 24 Ill. 2d 265, 1962 Ill. LEXIS 595

CourtIllinois Supreme Court

DecidedMarch 23, 1962

DocketNo. 36622

StatusPublished

This text of 181 N.E.2d 96 (People v. Mendoza) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Illinois Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Mendoza, 181 N.E.2d 96, 24 Ill. 2d 265, 1962 Ill. LEXIS 595 (Ill. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Schaefer

delivered the opinion of the court:

An information filed in the municipal court of Oak Park charged the defendant, Norman Mendoza, with stealing and carrying away four hubcaps from an automobile owned by George A. ICouros. After a trial before the court he was found guilty and sentenced to one year in the House of Correction, and fined $100. Subsequently, on the defendant’s motion to vacate the judgment, the court sustained the finding of guilty and the judgment imposing the fine, but vacated the sentence to the House of Correction. Upon appeal the Appellate Court for the First District affirmed the judgment. (30 Ill. App. 2d 108.) The defendant has prosecuted a further appeal to this court.

The questions raised in this court are the same questions that were adequately discussed and correctly decided by the Appellate Court, and no useful purpose would be served by additional discussion. The judgment of the Appellate Court is affirmed, and its opinion is adopted as the opinion of this court.

T , , ¿r , judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Mr. Justice Schaefer

delivered the opinion of the court:

An information filed in the municipal court of Oak Park charged the defendant, Norman Mendoza, with stealing and carrying away four hubcaps from an automobile owned by George A. ICouros. After a trial before the court he was found guilty and sentenced to one year in the House of Correction, and fined $100. Subsequently, on the defendant’s motion to vacate the judgment, the court sustained the finding of guilty and the judgment imposing the fine, but vacated the sentence to the House of Correction. Upon appeal the Appellate Court for the First District affirmed the judgment. (30 Ill. App. 2d 108.) The defendant has prosecuted a further appeal to this court.

The questions raised in this court are the same questions that were adequately discussed and correctly decided by the Appellate Court, and no useful purpose would be served by additional discussion. The judgment of the Appellate Court is affirmed, and its opinion is adopted as the opinion of this court.

T , , ¿r , judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

181 N.E.2d 96, 24 Ill. 2d 265, 1962 Ill. LEXIS 595, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mendoza-ill-1962.