Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

People v. Light

FEBRUARY 21, 1966.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,

v.

IVAN LIGHT, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.



Appeal from the Circuit Court of McLean County; the Hon. LELAND SIMKINS, Judge, presiding. Affirmed.

TRAPP, P.J.

Rehearing denied March 19, 1966.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of guilty, following a jury trial, upon an information charging the operation of a motor vehicle of the second division without having a certificate of safety required by Ill Rev Stats 1963, chap 95 1/2, § 220, and from the judgment imposing a fine of $15 and costs for the violation.

The defendant contends that a verdict should have been directed in his favor and his motion in arrest of judgment should have been allowed, for the reason that a certificate of safety was required only for motor vehicles of the second division and it was not established that his pickup truck was a motor vehicle of the second division as defined by the statute.

On June 6, 1964, the defendant, whose occupations include that of farm owner and operator, drove his 1961 International pickup truck from the Shirley bridge across U.S. Highway 66. There were one or two passengers in the truck and a few items such as peat moss bags and pipes in the truck bed. The vehicle did not bear a current certificate of safety generally required of vehicles of the second division as defined in "An Act in relation to the regulation of traffic," (Ill Rev Stats 1963, c 95 1/2, § 98-239). There was no other evidence of the use of the vehicle in question than the evidence of use on the occasion of the arrest on June 6, 1964.

Defendant's arguments regarding the violation of the statute may be condensed to the proposition that it was not established that his vehicle was a vehicle of the second division within the meaning of §§ 2, 123 and 123.10 of "An Act in relation to the regulation of traffic", (Ill Rev Stats 1963, c 95 1/2, §§ 99, 220 and 220.10).

The "Act in relation to the regulation of traffic" classifies motor vehicles in § 2 (Ill Rev Stats 1963, c 95 1/2, § 99), as follows:

"2. (a) Vehicle. Every device in, upon, or by which any person or property is or may be transported or drawn upon a highway, except devices moved by human power or used exclusively upon stationary rails or tracks.

"(b) Motor Vehicle. Every vehicle which is self propelled and every vehicle which is propelled by electric power obtained from overhead trolley wires, but not operated upon rails.

"For the purpose of this Act, motor vehicles as a class shall be divided into two divisions, viz.:

"First: Those vehicles which are designed and used for the carrying of not more than seven persons.

"Second: Those vehicles which are designed and used for pulling or carrying freight and also those vehicles or motor cars which are designed and used for the carrying of more than seven persons."

Section 123 of the Act (Ill Rev Stats 1963, c 95 1/2, § 220) requires all vehicles of the second division, except those inspected under the supervision of the Illinois Commerce Commission, those owned by certain municipal corporations, trailers less than 3,000 pounds, and certain farm vehicles, to have a certificate of safety.

There is no contention that defendant's vehicle falls within the description of a vehicle designed and used for carrying of more than seven persons.

The question, therefore, resolves itself into the inquiry whether defendant's 1961 International pickup truck falls within the statutory description of "vehicles which are ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.