The PEOPLE v. Tucker

Illinois Supreme Court

The PEOPLE v. Tucker

163 N.E.2d 510, 18 Ill. 2d 103, 1959 Ill. LEXIS 398

CourtIllinois Supreme Court

DecidedNovember 18, 1959

Docket35339

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 163 N.E.2d 510 (The PEOPLE v. Tucker) 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

The PEOPLE v. Tucker, 163 N.E.2d 510, 18 Ill. 2d 103, 1959 Ill. LEXIS 398 (Ill. 1959).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Klingbiel

delivered the opinion of the court:

By information filed in the county court of Whiteside County Gwendolyn Tucker was charged with keeping a house of ill fame. After trial by jury she was found guilty as charged, and punishment was fixed at a fine of $200 and confinement in the county jail for six months. Upon review by the Appellate Court for the Second District the judgment was affirmed. (21 Ill. App. 2d 46.) Defendant has prosecuted a writ of error from this court for further review.

To reverse the judgment defendant contends that the information was not sufficiently definite to enable her to prepare a defense; that incompetent evidence was admitted; that the evidence is insufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; that error was committed in giving and refusing instructions; and that the punishment is excessive. We have reviewed each of the points raised by defendant, and upon examination of the record find merit in none of them. The reasons and authorities are set forth in the opinion of the Appellate Court, which adequately considered and disposed of the same contentions; and where such is the case it is unnecessary for this court to discuss them again. (People v. Williams, 8 Ill.2d 140; People v. Lackaye, 1 Ill.2d 618.) We accordingly adopt the opinion of the Appellate Court as the opinion of this court. Its judgment being correct it is hereby affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Mr. Justice Klingbiel

delivered the opinion of the court:

By information filed in the county court of Whiteside County Gwendolyn Tucker was charged with keeping a house of ill fame. After trial by jury she was found guilty as charged, and punishment was fixed at a fine of $200 and confinement in the county jail for six months. Upon review by the Appellate Court for the Second District the judgment was affirmed. (21 Ill. App. 2d 46.) Defendant has prosecuted a writ of error from this court for further review.

To reverse the judgment defendant contends that the information was not sufficiently definite to enable her to prepare a defense; that incompetent evidence was admitted; that the evidence is insufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; that error was committed in giving and refusing instructions; and that the punishment is excessive. We have reviewed each of the points raised by defendant, and upon examination of the record find merit in none of them. The reasons and authorities are set forth in the opinion of the Appellate Court, which adequately considered and disposed of the same contentions; and where such is the case it is unnecessary for this court to discuss them again. (People v. Williams, 8 Ill.2d 140; People v. Lackaye, 1 Ill.2d 618.) We accordingly adopt the opinion of the Appellate Court as the opinion of this court. Its judgment being correct it is hereby affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

163 N.E.2d 510, 18 Ill. 2d 103, 1959 Ill. LEXIS 398, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/the-people-v-tucker-ill-1959.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack