{
  "id": 2824683,
  "name": "People of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. George H. Kozak, Defendant-Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "People v. Kozak",
  "decision_date": "1970-10-21",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 54,762",
  "first_page": "334",
  "last_page": "336",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "130 Ill. App. 2d 334"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "246 NE2d 457",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "108 Ill App2d 142",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        1595891
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-2d/108/0142-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 322,
    "char_count": 4541,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.604,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.2152768613179456e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7769978095248025
    },
    "sha256": "6aab33a153d8c223aea479f8da680df8a572cc8d1b1bd1b301085c11f513f113",
    "simhash": "1:0d6a53b65f88a9f9",
    "word_count": 750
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:36:32.959960+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "People of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. George H. Kozak, Defendant-Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "MR. PRESIDING JUSTICE STAMOS\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nAfter a bench trial, defendant was convicted of driving a motor vehicle while his driver\u2019s license was suspended, in violation of Ill Rev Stats 1967, c 95%, \u00a7 6-303 (a).1 He was placed on one year\u2019s probation. Defendant appeals and seeks a reversal of his conviction, or in the alternative, a new trial. Defendant contends (1) that the statute he was charged with violating is inapplicable to the facts of the case; (2) that he was not proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt; and (3) that the trial court erred in refusing to strike testimony as to defendant\u2019s admissions when the prosecution failed to prove the corpus delicti.\nThe agreed statement of facts shows that on June 14, 1969, police officers of the Berkeley Police Department investigated an automobile accident in the parking lot of Guido\u2019s Finer Foods. The investigation developed that defendant\u2019s vehicle had apparently struck an unoccupied vehicle and defendant admitted he was operating his vehicle at the time. Defendant\u2019s driver\u2019s license had been suspended a few days before this occurrence. The police testified that they did not see defendant operate his vehicle; that the parking lot is owned by Guido\u2019s Finer Foods and it is not a public body; and that no municipal or governmental body, to the officer\u2019s knowledge, maintains or cleans this parking lot.\nDefendant contends that the statute, which by its terms is applicable only when a person is driving a motor vehicle on a highway of this State, is not violated by driving in a parking lot which is not a \u201chighway\u201d as defined in Ill Rev Stats 1967, c 95\u00bd, \u00a7 1-121. We agree.\nIn People v. Erickson, 108 Ill App2d 142, 246 NE2d 457, the defendant was charged with driving a vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor in violation of section 47 of the Uniform Act Regulating Traffic on Highways (Ill Rev Stats 1967, c 95\u00bd, \u00a7 144(a)). As in the instant case, the occurrence took place in a privately-owned parking lot. In Erickson this court noted that the legislature did not restrict the offense of driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor to highways, and said at page 145, after referring to pertinent statutes :\n\u201cThe Illinois Legislature . . . , expressly and specifically provided that the offense of driving a vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor would apply, not only if it occurred upon highways, but \u201celsewhere throughout the state.\u201d\nHowever, in the present case the statute makes it a punishable offense to drive without a license on a highway without expanding the prohibition to \u201celsewhere throughout the state.\u201d Therefore, the prohibition does not extend to operation of a motor vehicle in a privately-owned parking lot.\nSince we have determined to reverse, we need not discuss defendant\u2019s remaining contentions.\nThe judgment is reversed.\nReversed.\nDRUCKER and ENGLISH, JJ., concur.\nChapter 95%, Section 6-303(a), Illinois Revised Statutes, 1967. Any person who drives a motor vehicle on any highway of this State at a time when his operator\u2019s or chauffeur\u2019s license or permit or privilege so to do or his privilege to obtain a license or permit under this Act is revoked or suspended as provided by this Act or any other Act, except as may be allowed by a restricted driving permit issued under this Act, shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than 7 days nor more than 1 year and there may be imposed in addition thereto a fine of not more than $1,000.\nChapter 95\u00bd, Section 1-121. Highway.\nThe entire width between the boundary lines of every way publicly maintained when any part thereof is open to the use of the public for purposes of vehicular travel.\nSection 47 of the Uniform Act Regulating Highways (Ill Rev Stats 1967, c 95\u00bd, \u00a7 144(a)) provides that an intoxicated person may not drive or be in control of a vehicle \u201cwithin this state.\u201d This terminology is further defined in Section 20 of the Act which states that the provisions of Article V (Driving While Intoxicated, Transporting Alcoholic Liquor, and Reckless Driving) apply, \u201cupon highways and elsewhere throughout the state.\u201d (Emphasis supplied.)",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "MR. PRESIDING JUSTICE STAMOS"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Andrew M. Raucci, of Chicago, for appellant.",
      "Edward V. Hanrahan, State\u2019s Attorney of Cook County, of Chicago (Robert A. Novelle and Zenon Forowycz, Assistant State\u2019s Attorneys, of counsel), for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "People of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. George H. Kozak, Defendant-Appellant.\nGen. No. 54,762.\nFirst District, Fourth Division.\nOctober 21, 1970.\nAndrew M. Raucci, of Chicago, for appellant.\nEdward V. Hanrahan, State\u2019s Attorney of Cook County, of Chicago (Robert A. Novelle and Zenon Forowycz, Assistant State\u2019s Attorneys, of counsel), for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0334-01",
  "first_page_order": 340,
  "last_page_order": 342
}