{
  "id": 3633413,
  "name": "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. DANIEL GOBLE, Defendant-Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "People v. Goble",
  "decision_date": "1984-06-29",
  "docket_number": "No. 4\u201483\u20140791",
  "first_page": "289",
  "last_page": "291",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "125 Ill. App. 3d 289"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "442 N.E.2d 154",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "92 Ill. 2d 490",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        3098298
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/92/0490-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "279 N.E.2d 353",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "50 Ill. 2d 196",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        2912609
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/50/0196-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 356,
    "char_count": 5373,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.731,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.858254398318064e-08,
      "percentile": 0.3062157291795777
    },
    "sha256": "e916cec14a6495d2bcdeac2d8c5a4f24b87c6536a67ea407b852c9b9a2f6795a",
    "simhash": "1:3c2b263d62923870",
    "word_count": 907
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:49:19.537276+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. DANIEL GOBLE, Defendant-Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "JUSTICE WEBBER\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nFollowing a jury trial, defendant was convicted of five counts of burglary, violations of section 19 \u2014 1(a) of the Criminal Code of 1961 (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1983, ch. 38, par. 19 \u2014 1(a)). He was sentenced to concurrent terms of four years\u2019 imprisonment. Defendant appeals the trial court\u2019s imposition of sentence. We affirm.\nBecause defendant does not contest the propriety of his convictions, an extended recitation of the facts is unnecessary. Suffice it to say that the evidence established that on September 23, 1982, defendant unlawfully entered into five vehicles that were parked near a bowling alley in Danville, Illinois. Several items of personal property that were in the vehicles were either taken or tampered with by defendant. The evidence also established that defendant was assisted by an accomplice, Thomas Lutz, who acted as a lookout for defendant. After a separate jury trial, Lutz was also convicted of five counts of burglary stemming from this incident. Lutz, however, was sentenced to concurrent terms of four years\u2019 probation.\nDefendant\u2019s arguments on appeal center about a claimed disparate sentence. As indicated, he received four years\u2019 imprisonment and Lutz, who had been previously tried to a jury and found guilty, received four years\u2019 probation. Defendant has supplemented the record in this court with a copy of Lutz\u2019 presentence report.\nDefendant\u2019s presentence report indicates that he had been convicted previously of contributing to the sexual delinquency of a child in 1980 and indecent liberties with a child in 1977. He was sentenced to one year's probation for the former offense and to a term of imprisonment of not less than four years and not more than six years for the latter offense. Indecent liberties was a Class 1 felony (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 38, par. 11 \u2014 4(c)).\nLutz\u2019 presentence report indicates that he was convicted of \u201carmed robbery\u201d in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, in 1980.\nFrom this state of the record, defendant argues that he was sentenced under section 5 \u2014 5\u20143(c)(2)(F) of the Unified Code of Corrections (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1983, ch. 38, par. 1005 \u2014 5\u20143(c)(2)(F)), which provides in substance that a sentence of probation shall not be imposed on one who has been convicted of a Class 2 or greater felony, if that person had been convicted of a Class 2 or greater felony within 10 years of the date on which he committed the offense for which he was being sentenced. Burglary is a Class 2 felony. (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1983, ch. 38, par. 19 \u2014 1(b).) Since Lutz was sentenced to probation, defendant extrapolates that the statute applies only to offenses and offenders within the State of Illinois and thus is unconstitutional as a denial of equal protection.\nWe disagree. An examination of the transcript of defendant\u2019s sentencing hearing reveals no mention by either court or counsel of section 5 \u2014 5\u20143(c)(2)(F) of the Code. The court stated only, \u201cI do not feel I can impose a minimum sentence with your prior record, Mr. Goble.\u201d The question of section 5 \u2014 5\u20143(c)(2)(F) is raised for the first time on appeal. See People v. Amerman (1971), 50 Ill. 2d 196, 279 N.E.2d 353.\nFurthermore, the statute itself contains no language which indicates that a differentiation exists between offenses committed in this State and elsewhere. Nor do we have any information as to whether it was considered at Lutz\u2019 sentencing hearing.\nAlso of significance is the fact that defendant assumes that \u201carmed robbery,\u201d as set forth in Lutz\u2019 presentence report, is a Class 2 or greater felony. At oral argument counsel stated that this court could take judicial notice of the laws of Alberta, Canada. Such a statement overlooks section 8 \u2014 1007 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which provides:\n\u201cThe law of a jurisdiction other than those referred to in Section 8 \u2014 1003 of this Act shall be an issue for the court, but shall not be subject to the foregoing provisions concerning judicial notice.\u201d Ill. Rev. Stat. 1983, ch. 110, par. 8 \u2014 1007.\nFrom the record presented to us we cannot determine the quality of armed robbery in Alberta, Canada, nor can we determine whether the matter was presented to the trial court in Lutz\u2019 case. As the record stands, defendant has a prior conviction of a Class 1 felony within 10 years of the instant offense, and Lutz has only a bare statement in a presentence report, prepared by a layman, indicating some offense in Alberta, Canada, for which he received a prison sentence.\nIt is the burden of the defendant, when arguing disparate sentences, to produce a record upon which a rational comparison can be made. (People v. Kline (1982), 92 Ill. 2d 490, 442 N.E.2d 154.) This he has failed to do in the instant case, and we therefore find no basis to interfere with the trial court\u2019s judgment.\nThe sentence imposed by the circuit court of Vermilion County is therefore affirmed.\nAffirmed.\nTRAPP and GREEN, JJ., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "JUSTICE WEBBER"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Daniel D. Yuhas and David Bergschneider, both of State Appellate Defender\u2019s Office, of Springfield, for appellant.",
      "Edward Litak, State\u2019s Attorney, of Danville (Robert J. Biderman and Linda Welge, both of State\u2019s Attorneys Appellate Service Commission, of counsel), for the People."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. DANIEL GOBLE, Defendant-Appellant.\nFourth District\nNo. 4\u201483\u20140791\nOpinion filed June 29, 1984.\nDaniel D. Yuhas and David Bergschneider, both of State Appellate Defender\u2019s Office, of Springfield, for appellant.\nEdward Litak, State\u2019s Attorney, of Danville (Robert J. Biderman and Linda Welge, both of State\u2019s Attorneys Appellate Service Commission, of counsel), for the People."
  },
  "file_name": "0289-01",
  "first_page_order": 311,
  "last_page_order": 313
}