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. Gulick

SEPTEMBER 19, 1972.

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

v.

HARRY GULICK, JR., DEFENDANT-APPELLEE.



APPEAL from the Circuit Court of McDonough County; the Hon. EZRA J. CLARK, Judge, presiding.

MR. JUSTICE DIXON DELIVERED THE OPINION OF THE COURT:

The defendant Harry Gulick, Jr., was indicted for burglary and theft. He was later indicted for violation of bail bond. On August 2, 1971, the trial court by separate orders, ordered that the defendant be discharged from custody because he was not brought to trial within 120 days as provided by section 103-5 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (Ill. Rev. Stat., ch. 38, par. 103-5.) The State has appealed from those orders and we consolidated the causes for the purposes of this appeal.

On September 16, 1970, the defendant was arrested. He posted bond which was forfeited when he failed to appear for a preliminary hearing on October 23, 1970. The burglary and theft indictment was returned November 10, 1970, while defendant was a fugitive. The bail bond indictment was returned January 8, 1971. The defendant was later found in Burlington, Iowa, and was returned to Illinois on March 18, 1971. An attorney was appointed on April 1 and the cases continued to April 21 for filing of defense motions. On April 29, 1971, the defendant appeared in court with his appointed attorney and the following took place:

"Defense Attorney Simshauser:

* * * the record shows that cause continued to April 21st for filing of motions, I was not aware of that. I would ask the Court's leave to let defendant plead this morning and then ask the Court for further time to prepare and file motions either of a discovery nature or directed against the indictment which I will have to study over.

The Court: Well of course I wouldn't know, Mr. Simshauser, why you weren't aware of the —

Mr. Simshauser: I'll take the responsibility for that, judge. * * *"

The arraignment followed, and a plea of not guilty, whereon

"The Court: Now, Mr. Simshauser, as I would understand it, you have made a request for time, * * * in which to file motions directed to the indictment and any other motions that you might desire to make.

Defense Attorney: Yes, sir.

The Court: How much time do you want?

Defense Attorney: Fifteen days, Your Honor.

The Court: Any objections?

State's Attorney: ...


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.