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. Williams

MAY 27, 1971.

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

v.

CARL WILLIAMS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.



APPEAL from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. JAMES D. CROSSON, Judge, presiding.

MR. PRESIDING JUSTICE MCNAMARA DELIVERED THE OPINION OF THE COURT:

Defendant, Carl Williams, was indicted for the crime of armed robbery. On November 20, 1968, he withdrew his plea of not guilty, pleaded guilty to that charge and was sentenced to a term of 2 to 8 years in the penitentiary. On appeal he contends that the trial court erred in accepting his plea of guilty.

On August 23, 1967, defendant, along with two others charged in the indictment, were arraigned. At the arraignment, counsel was appointed for defendant and he was given a copy of the indictment. Defendant entered a plea of not guilty to the indictment, and on the following day made a motion for a list of witnesses. Subsequent motions made on behalf of defendant were for a bill of particulars and to suppress identification testimony. The bill of particulars was given to defendant. Prior to trial date private counsel was retained.

On November 20, 1968, the case came to trial. The record reflects the following discourse:

"MR. HOWARD: Your Honor, for the record my name is George Howard and I represent each of the three defendants that is before the court under indictment for armed robbery.

I have had extensive conversation with the defendant concerning the charges and the facts in this case and after having that conversation, each one of the defendants has advised me that he wishes to withdraw his plea of not guilty heretofore entered and enter a plea of guilty to the above indictment.

I have advised each one of the defendants that he has the right to a trial by jury and have advised them that they have a right to have their case heard by this Court, and understanding that they have advised me that they wish to enter a plea of guilty.

THE COURT: Speaking to each of the defendants, Mr. Colbert, Mr. Phillips, and Mr. Williams, you have just heard what your attorney has told the Court.

He said that you desire to withdraw your pleas of not guilty heretofore made to indictment No. 67 — Is that 02808?

STATE'S ATTORNEY: It's 2808, Judge.

THE COURT: (Continuing) * * * is that correct, and you want to enter a plea of guilty instead of not guilty; is that correct?

DEFENDANT COLBERT: Yes, Sir.

DEFENDANT PHILLIPS: Yes, Sir."

The trial judge continued in determining the voluntariness of the plea of guilty, and admonished all three men as to the possible penalty that could be imposed upon them upon a determination of their guilt. After the recitation of each right, the trial judge paused to allow the three defendants to respond with an acknowledgement of their understanding. The record reveals the affirmative responses of the two co-defendants. The record is silent as to the response of defendant Williams. Immediately after the admonition, it was stipulated that the facts contained in the indictment were true and correct and sufficient to sustain a convicion for armed robbery. During the determination of the factual basis for the plea of guilty, defendant responded to an inquiry about his age. The judge also asked him if he had anything to say in mitigation. Defendant replied that he did not have anything to say. Toward the end of the hearing, while explaining post-conviction rights, the court ...


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.