{ "id": 2702037, "name": "The People of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Wesley Ward, Defendant-Appellant", "name_abbreviation": "People v. Ward", "decision_date": "1975-02-20", "docket_number": "No. 72-200", "first_page": "1045", "last_page": "1047", "citations": [ { "type": "official", "cite": "25 Ill. App. 3d 1045" } ], "court": { "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.", "id": 8837, "name": "Illinois Appellate Court" }, "jurisdiction": { "id": 29, "name_long": "Illinois", "name": "Ill." }, "cites_to": [ { "cite": "60 Ill.2d 159", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill. 2d", "case_ids": [ 5414942 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill-2d/60/0159-01" ] }, { "cite": "413 U.S. 15", "category": "reporters:federal", "reporter": "U.S.", "case_ids": [ 11338628 ], "weight": 3, "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/us/413/0015-01" ] }, { "cite": "59 Ill.2d 362", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill. 2d", "case_ids": [ 2958695 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill-2d/59/0362-01" ] }, { "cite": "93 S.Ct. 3046", "category": "reporters:federal", "reporter": "S. Ct.", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "37 L.Ed.2d 1030", "category": "reporters:federal", "reporter": "L. Ed. 2d", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "413 U.S. 912", "category": "reporters:federal", "reporter": "U.S.", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "282 N.E.2d 691", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "N.E.2d", "weight": 4, "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "51 Ill.2d 410", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill. 2d", "case_ids": [ 5392659 ], "weight": 4, "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill-2d/51/0410-01" ] } ], "analysis": { "cardinality": 278, "char_count": 4153, "ocr_confidence": 0.707, "pagerank": { "raw": 8.724443257361318e-08, "percentile": 0.49401760488738916 }, "sha256": "20a70c206b16c3c029c672a509d414c2811f89a915684869e406ca07bd7b2b01", "simhash": "1:c3966e15af8ed0c1", "word_count": 677 }, "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:50:56.200740+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. Wesley Ward, Defendant-Appellant." ], "opinions": [ { "text": "Mr. JUSTICE STOUDER\ndelivered the ppinion of the court:\nThis is an appeal from the judgment of the circuit court of Peoria County finding defendant, Wesley Ward, guilty of violating section 11\u2014 20(a)(1) of the Criminal Code (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1971, ch. 38, par. 11\u2014 20(a) (1)) by selling two obscene publications. Defendant waived a jury and after bench trial was found guilty and sentenced to 1 day in jail and fined $200. The only witness for the State, was the..complaining police officer who testified he purchased the two publications, \u201cBizarre World\u201d and \u201cIllustrated Case Histories, a Study of Sado-Masochism,\u201d at defendant\u2019s store. The police officer\u2019s testimony and the magazines themselves were the sole evidence presented by the State. Defendant presented no evidence, and after his motion for judgment was denied, judgment was entered against the defendant.\nThere are three principal issues on this appeal. The resolution on each of these is governed by the case of People v. Ridens, 51 Ill.2d 410, 282 N.E.2d 691, which was granted certiorari by the United States Supreme Court in 413 U.S. 912, 37 L.Ed.2d 1030, 93 S.Ct. 3046. The Supreme Court vacated the judgment and remanded the case to the Illinois Supreme Court, 59 Ill.2d 362, which affirmed the convictions of the defendant. The United States Supreme Court, in vacating and remanding tire initial decision in the Ridens case, directed the Illinois Supreme Court to reconsider the case in light of the holdings of the United States Supreme Court in Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15, 37 L.Ed.2d 419, 93 S.Ct. 2607, and other related cases decided by the Court at the same time. After reconsideration of the Ridens case the Illinois Supreme Court reaffirmed the defendant\u2019s conviction and concluded that the Illinois obscenity statute (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1969, ch. 38, par. 11 \u2014 20) complied with the standards announced in the United States Supreme Court cases.\nThe first issue is whether the State\u2019s evidence consisting of magazines made up almost exclusively of photographs constituted sufficient proof to establish violation of the obscenity statute and, therefore, whether the failure to present opinion testimony as to contemporary community standards was fatal to the State\u2019s case. The Illinois Supreme Court in People v. Ridens, 51 Ill.2d 410, 282 N.E.2d 691, held that such opinion testimony was not required. The court there held that the publications themselves constituted sufficient evidence to support defendant\u2019s conviction for violating the statute.\nThe second issue is whether it was necessary for the State to prove either the sale to minors or the intrusion upon the privacy of unwilling adults in order to convict defendant of violating the statute by selling the magazines. The court in People v. Ridens, 51 Ill.2d 410, 282 N.E.2d 691, held that defendant\u2019s claim that the obscenity ordinance and code were deficient because they did not require proof that .the offending publications -were sold to minors or intruded upon the privacy of unwilling adults was -ytithout merit. In accord with this case, we hold here that it was not necessary \u00a1fpr /the State to prove either the sale to minors or the intrusion upon the privacy