{
  "id": 1595856,
  "name": "People of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Melvin Turner (Impleaded), and Wendell Horne (Impleaded), Defendants-Appellants",
  "name_abbreviation": "People v. Turner",
  "decision_date": "1969-04-02",
  "docket_number": "Gen. Nos. 52,702, 52,703. (Consolidated.)",
  "first_page": "132",
  "last_page": "138",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "108 Ill. App. 2d 132"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "125 NE 882",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "291 Ill 154",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2422377
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/291/0154-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "192 NE2d 568",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "43 Ill App2d 42",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        5246159
      ],
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "47"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-2d/43/0042-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "203 NE2d 761",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "54 Ill App2d 212",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        5281940
      ],
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "216"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-2d/54/0212-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "195 NE2d 631",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "30 Ill2d 216",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        2829348
      ],
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "219"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/30/0216-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 570,
    "char_count": 9921,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.578,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.113930744360677e-07,
      "percentile": 0.5713804163872103
    },
    "sha256": "0278e2036a3a87fde8d37020f4e2c6603f7ec3d789f2018f24f2e5c9368f6f4a",
    "simhash": "1:a292db34200ed6ae",
    "word_count": 1792
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:14:53.517701+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "ENGLISH and McNAMARA, JJ., concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "People of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Melvin Turner (Impleaded), and Wendell Horne (Impleaded), Defendants-Appellants."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "MR. PRESIDING JUSTICE DRUCKER\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nDefendants appeal from their convictions, after a bench trial, of attempt robbery. Both were sentenced to the Illinois State Penitentiary; Horne for a term of one to four years, and Turner for a term of one to five years. Defendants contend that the State failed to prove the essential elements of the crime.\nEVIDENCE\nTestimony of R. T. Wells, complaining witness:\nHe is a taxi driver for the Checker Taxi Company. He has been driving a taxi for 18 years and has been employed by Checker for about three years.\nAt about 1:20 a. m. on January 30,1967, he was driving a taxi south on Woodlawn and picked up the defendants at about 47th and Woodlawn. He was instructed to take them to 55th and Prairie. As they proceeded to that point they passed another taxi driver in his private car, and the witness blew his horn and waved. Turner asked if he knew the other driver and said, \u201cThat fellow is pretty fast with a knife.\u201d\nThey proceeded west on 47th and then turned south on Drexel. As they approached 49th Street Horne suggested that he pull over. Horne said, \u201cThis is good enough.\u201d The witness said, \u201c49th Street, you say?\u201d and Horne said, \u201cYes, this is it.\u201d The witness looked over, turned on his top light and stopped. After h\u00e9 turned on the top light, Horne said, \u201cThis is it.\u201d\nThe witness looked back and saw that Horne had his left hand on a gun which was partially in his left front pocket. He saw the handle and the nickel plate. He stopped the taxi in the middle of the intersection and leaped from it. From outside of the taxi he saw the front part of the gun go up; it was small, a .32 or a .38. He ran north on Drexel some 40 or 50 feet. He then turned around and saw Turner getting over the seat and under the wheel. The taxi then moved off.\nHe stopped another taxi going south on Drexel and told the driver that a couple of guys had tried to rob him. He then saw a police car going south, so he jumped out of the cab and stopped the police car. The police car started after his taxi on Drexel.\nWhen he next saw the cab it was stopped in front of 4930 South Drexel. As the squad car approached the taxi the defendants jumped out and ran. The police officers chased the defendants and caught them lying in a snowbank.\nHe has been robbed about seven or eight times in the 18 years that he has driven a taxi; in each instance the robbers had been drinking. He did not smell the defendants\u2019 breath but they had had a few drinks.\nTestimony of Consie Anderson, called by the State:\nHe is a police officer for the City of Chicago. On the morning of January 30, 1967, he was in a patrol car with Officers Jessie Cox and Walter Brown. As their car was proceeding southbound on Drexel, R. T. Wells approached the car and explained that two men had attempted to rob him. They went in pursuit of Wells\u2019 taxi. They found the cab moving along Drexel; and as they approached, the cab stopped and two men emerged. The two men crossed Drexel and ran into a yard. The officers pursued and he found defendant Horne lying in knee-deep snow. His partners returned with defendant Turner.\nTestimony of Officer Jessie Cox, called by the State:\nHe was in the patrol car with officers Anderson and Brown on the morning in question. He found defendant Turner hiding in some hedges. There were no weapons recovered. Otherwise his testimony is substantially the same as that of Officer Anderson.\nTestimony of Wendell Ray Horne, a defendant:\nIn the early morning of January 30,1967, he was in the company of defendant Turner celebrating Turner\u2019s birthday. They left a tavern with the intention of going to defendant Turner\u2019s girl friend\u2019s house located on 60th Street. They hailed a taxi and Turner directed it to 55th Street in order to buy some liquor before going on to his girl friend\u2019s. The cab proceeded along until it ended up going south on Drexel.\nWhen the cab got to the 4800 block he told defendant Turner, \u201cMelvin, I\u2019m not going to go with you.\u201d He then told the taxi driver, \u201cWhen you get to the corner you can let me out.\u201d The driver did not say anything. When they got to 49th the witness said, \u201cHold on man, this is it right here.\u201d At that time the driver slowed the taxi down and then he was gone; the taxi was still moving when he left it. Defendant Turner climbed over the front seat to stop the cab which was still rolling; and he stopped the cab in front of a nursing home at 4938 Drexel Avenue. The driver had run off towards 47th Street.\nHe had worked at the nursing home and he knew the owner and the nurses and most of the patients. He decided to stop there and visit the graveyard shift. That\u2019s why he wanted to get out at 49th. Defendant Turner was going on to visit his girl friend.\nThey had been drinking a lot because they had been celebrating. He did not have a .38 or a .32 revolver in his possession. When the driver jumped from the taxi he said, \u201cYou are not going to get my $25.00.\u201d\nHe got out of the taxi after defendant Turner stopped it and he proceeded into the yard in front of the nursing home. The snow was deep and he fell into it. Just as he fell in the snow the police came over and he heard them hollering, \u201cWhere\u2019s the other one, where\u2019s the other one?\u201d So he said, \u201cHere I am, over here.\u201d Officer Anderson came over then and took him and defendant Turner to the police station. They were searched, and no gun was found.\nHe did not use the driveway entrance to the nursing home because it was too far away; so he stepped over the hedge and walked through the snow. He did not run from the cab.\nDefendant Melvin Turner did not testify.\nOPINION\nDefendants contend that the evidence does not show that a substantial step was taken toward the commission of a crime nor that force was used or threatened. They claim that the taxi driver was so fearful of a robbery attempt that he misinterpreted defendant Horne\u2019s statement, \u201cThis is good enough, this is it\u201d; and although there is no evidence to support it, defendants now urge that the driver mistook Horne\u2019s wallet for a small pistol. Defendants point out that no gun was ever found, and that they have a reasonable explanation for their actions.\nThe accounts of what occurred that early morning are very similar. The only real conflicts concern the existence of a gun, defendant Horne\u2019s intent when he told the driver to pull over, the movement of the taxi when the driver jumped from it, and the defendants\u2019 flight from the taxi when the police approached.\nWhen a cause is tried without a jury, it is the function of the trial court to determine the credibility of the witnesses and the weight to be afforded their testimony, and where the evidence is merely conflicting a reviewing court will not substitute its judgment for that of the trier of fact. People v. Clark, 30 Ill2d 216, 219, 195 NE2d 631. The trial court evidently believed that the taxi driver, after being requested to stop at a place other than the announced destination, heard Horne say: \u201cThis is it,\u201d and saw Horne put his hand on a pistol which he then saw go up. We believe these actions constituted a substantial step towards the commission of a robbery and also a threat of the imminent use of force.\nDefendants next contend that the State did not prove the specific intent to rob. They argue that the words, \u201cThis is good enough, this is it\u201d cannot be interpreted as threatening a holdup; those words, they insist, only indicate that the defendants wanted the driver to stop the taxi and let them off. They point out that there was no demand for money, nor was there an attempt to take any property. Proof of specific intent to rob is necessary, but competent circumstantial evidence may establish the requisite intent. People v. Hawkins, 54 Ill App2d 212, 216, 203 NE2d 761; People v. Bonner, 43 Ill App2d 42, 47, 192 NE2d 568. Even if the sudden request to stop the taxi together with Horne\u2019s statement, \u201cThis is it,\u201d were made in the most innocent manner, the production of a gun by defendant Horne is sufficient circumstantial evidence of an intent to commit a crime.\nDefendants then argue that even if the gun shows an intent to commit a crime, the State has not proven that there was an intent to rob. However, the Illinois Supreme Court, in People v. Kuhn, 291 Ill 154, 125 NE 882, said at page 158:\nThe method employed and the order given were those usually employed and given in an assault with intent to rob, and the fact that there was no robbery was evidently due to the failure of (the complaining witness) to obey the order. The fact that he defended himself and prevented the robbery has no tendency to disprove the alleged intent.\nThat language is directly applicable to the instant case.\nAfter examining the entire record we believe that the defendants were proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.\nAffirmed.\nENGLISH and McNAMARA, JJ., concur.\nAttempt is defined in the Criminal Code, 111 Rev Stats, 1967, c 38, \u00a7 8-4:\n\u00a7 8-4. Attempt\nA person commits an attempt when, with intent to commit a specific offense, he does any act which constitutes a substantial step toward the commission of that offense.\nRobbery is defined in section 18-1 of that code:\n\u00a7 18-1. Robbery\nA person commits robbery when he takes property from the person or presence of another by the use of force or by threatening the imminent use of force.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "MR. PRESIDING JUSTICE DRUCKER"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Gerald W. Getty, Public Defender of Cook County, of Chicago (James J. Doherty, Assistant Public Defender, of counsel), for appellants.",
      "John J. Stamos, State\u2019s Attorney of Cook County, of Chicago (Elmer C. Kissane and Oliver D. Ferguson, Assistant State\u2019s Attorneys, of counsel), for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "People of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Melvin Turner (Impleaded), and Wendell Horne (Impleaded), Defendants-Appellants.\nGen. Nos. 52,702, 52,703. (Consolidated.)\nFirst District, Fourth Division.\nApril 2, 1969.\nGerald W. Getty, Public Defender of Cook County, of Chicago (James J. Doherty, Assistant Public Defender, of counsel), for appellants.\nJohn J. Stamos, State\u2019s Attorney of Cook County, of Chicago (Elmer C. Kissane and Oliver D. Ferguson, Assistant State\u2019s Attorneys, of counsel), for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0132-01",
  "first_page_order": 138,
  "last_page_order": 144
}