{ "id": 5436073, "name": "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Appellant, v. JAMES RANSOM, a/k/a Melvin Ransom, et al.-(James Ransom, Appellee.)", "name_abbreviation": "People v. Ransom", "decision_date": "1976-12-03", "docket_number": "No. 48136", "first_page": "339", "last_page": "343", "citations": [ { "type": "official", "cite": "65 Ill. 2d 339" } ], "court": { "name_abbreviation": "Ill.", "id": 8772, "name": "Illinois Supreme Court" }, "jurisdiction": { "id": 29, "name_long": "Illinois", "name": "Ill." }, "cites_to": [ { "cite": "41 Ill. 2d 351", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill. 2d", "case_ids": [ 2853189 ], "pin_cites": [ { "page": "360" } ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill-2d/41/0351-01" ] }, { "cite": "28 Ill. 2d 116", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill. 2d", "case_ids": [ 5363269 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill-2d/28/0116-01" ] }, { "cite": "33 Ill. App. 3d 503", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d", "case_ids": [ 2868945 ], "weight": 2, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "505-06" } ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill-app-3d/33/0503-01" ] } ], "analysis": { "cardinality": 416, "char_count": 6516, "ocr_confidence": 0.896, "pagerank": { "raw": 1.2052071839396623e-07, "percentile": 0.5946514642359458 }, "sha256": "a865ec9c437514fa7a842c4c0a31858add03722d5091fb1c057238a51e2d3bea", "simhash": "1:fef9e5d9d809a8db", "word_count": 1107 }, "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:48:37.889160+00:00", "provenance": { "date_added": "2019-08-29", "source": "Harvard", "batch": "2018" }, "casebody": { "judges": [], "parties": [ "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Appellant, v. JAMES RANSOM, a/k/a Melvin Ransom, et al.\u2014(James Ransom, Appellee.)" ], "opinions": [ { "text": "MR. JUSTICE UNDERWOOD\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nDefendant James Ransom was found guilty by a St. Clair County circuit court jury of the murder of Ernest Tiller and was subsequently sentenced to 14 to 30 years\u2019 imprisonment. The trial judge directed a verdict of not guilty as to co-defendant Freddie Macklin at the close of the State\u2019s evidence. Ransom appealed, the Appellate Court for the Fifth District, with one judge dissenting, reversed and remanded for a new trial (33 Ill. App. 3d 503), and we allowed the State\u2019s petition for leave to appeal.\nThe events upon which the murder charge was based occurred on the evening of March 5, 1973. Several persons had gathered at the home of Ransom\u2019s grandmother, Mattie Bond, when defendants arrived between 9 and 10 p.m. About 15 minutes later Ernest Tiller arrived at the front sunporch door but was prevented from entering by Ransom and Macklin, who pushed him outside. Those in the house heard \u201chollering and yelling,\u201d went outside and saw Tiller lying face down in the road, his head in a pool of blood, and Ransom standing over him holding aboard. The testimony indicated Ransom struck Tiller twice with the board and that Macklin, who was wearing brass knuckles, knocked unconscious two witnesses who tried to intervene. Although these witnesses were taken to the hospital, no one observed what subsequently happened to Tiller. One of the witnesses did state that Tiller\u2019s mother said he had gotten up and come to her house after the beating. No other testimony was offered as to decedent\u2019s activities or condition between the night of March 5 and March 12, the date of his death.\nDefendant has urged in the appellate court and here that the evidence was insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant caused decedent\u2019s death, and that, even assuming the evidence sufficient, reversible error occurred in the admission of prejudicial hearsay testimony by the coroner\u2019s physician. We agree with the appellate court that there was' \u201csufficient evidence for a jury to find that Ernest Tiller\u2019s death was caused by the beating administered to him by the defendant James Ransom\u201d (33 Ill. App. 3d 503, 505-06). We do not agree, however, that the testimony of the coroner\u2019s physician was inadmissible hearsay, which was the basis for the appellate court\u2019s remandment.\nDr. John J. Thomas, a surgeon and coroner\u2019s physician in St. Louis, testified that he had conducted a postmortem examination on March 12 of a body the identity of which was known to him \u201cOnly from the name given on the body.\u201d He was asked the name, defendant objected because the answer would be hearsay, the assistant State\u2019s Attorney indicated this proof was \u201cmerely a connecting link,\u201d and the objection was overruled by the court \u201cSubject to the fact that you can connect this all up.\u201d Dr. Thomas then testified \u201cthere was a tag on the body\u201d and that the name on the tag was \u201cErnest Tiller.\u201d The doctor related his findings, which included lacerated wounds on the front and back of the skull, which had been sutured, a nine-inch incised wound on the anterior left forearm, moderate subarachnoid hemorrhage about the back and the frontal lobe of the brain, dilated ventricles, and congestion of the lungs with \u201ca lot of blood.\u201d In the doctor\u2019s opinion the actual cause of death was traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage, and the secondary cause was the pneumonia. Dr. Thomas further answered \u201cNo\u201d when asked \u201cWere there any other identifying marks on the body apart from the tag?\u201d\nAlvin Cobb, the manager of the Officer Funeral Home, testified that he had known decedent and was called by decedent\u2019s family to pick up decedent\u2019s body at the St. Louis city morgue; that his employees did so and that the witness observed the body when it arrived at the funeral home and recognized it as that of Ernest Tiller; that the body \u201cwas marked in two places\u201d; that it bore \u201can arm band from the hospital which says the name and the doctor.\u201d An objection was sustained as to what was stated on the arm band, and the witness was then asked \u201cWas there a mark on there too?\u201d He testified that there was and the name on it was Ernest Tiller. These identifying characteristics were buried with the body. Mr. Cobb also identified as Ernest Tiller a picture stated by witnesses to the beating to be a picture of Tiller.\nIt is, in our opinion, clear from this record that the State\u2019s purpose in offering Dr. Thomas\u2019 testimony regarding the name tag on the body upon which the doctor performed a postmortem examination was not, as the appellate court stated, to prove the body to which the tag was attached was that of Ernest Tiller. Rather, it was for the purpose of showing that that body was the same body delivered to the funeral home and identified by its manager as that of Ernest Tiller. For that purpose it was competent, relevant testimony, and the trial judge, recognizing the distinction, properly admitted it. People v. Carpenter (1963), 28 Ill. 2d 116.\nThe problem, if there be any, arises from the fact that Dr. Thomas spoke only of a \u201ctag\u201d attached to the body he examined, whereas the most reasonable inference to be drawn from Alvin Cobb\u2019s testimony is that there was an arm band and a tag on the body he identified as that of Ernest Tiller. We do not regard this as a matter of consequence, however, since it is undisputed that the name \u201cErnest Tiller\u201d was on the body, and the wounds were compatible with the type of beating described by the witnesses. (Cf. People v. Gendron (1968), 41 Ill. 2d 351, 360.) Too, the postmortem appears to have been performed at the St. Louis city morgue, and it was from that morgue that the body was brought to the funeral home.\nThe judgment of the appellate court is accordingly reversed, and the judgment of the circuit court of St. Clair County is affirmed.\nAppellate court reversed; circuit court affirmed.", "type": "majority", "author": "MR. JUSTICE UNDERWOOD" } ], "attorneys": [ "William J. Scott, Attorney General, of Springfield, and Robert H. Rice, State\u2019s Attorney, of Belleville (James B. Zagel, Jayne A. Carr, and Raymond McKoski, Assistant Attorneys General, and Bruce D. Irish and Raymond F. Buckley, Jr., of Illinois State\u2019s Attorneys Association Statewide Appellate Assistance Service, of Mount Vernon, of counsel), for the People.", "Michael J. Rosborough, Deputy Defender, Office of State Appellate Defender, of Mount Vernon, for appellee." ], "corrections": "", "head_matter": "(No. 48136.\nTHE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Appellant, v. JAMES RANSOM, a/k/a Melvin Ransom, et al.\u2014(James Ransom, Appellee.)\nOpinion filed December 3, 1976.\nWilliam J. Scott, Attorney General, of Springfield, and Robert H. Rice, State\u2019s Attorney, of Belleville (James B. Zagel, Jayne A. Carr, and Raymond McKoski, Assistant Attorneys General, and Bruce D. Irish and Raymond F. Buckley, Jr., of Illinois State\u2019s Attorneys Association Statewide Appellate Assistance Service, of Mount Vernon, of counsel), for the People.\nMichael J. Rosborough, Deputy Defender, Office of State Appellate Defender, of Mount Vernon, for appellee." }, "file_name": "0339-01", "first_page_order": 411, "last_page_order": 415 }