{
  "id": 2911581,
  "name": "The People of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Eugene Thomas, Defendant-Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "People v. Thomas",
  "decision_date": "1972-03-08",
  "docket_number": "No. 55054",
  "first_page": "535",
  "last_page": "538",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "4 Ill. App. 3d 535"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "208 N.E.2d 670",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "60 Ill.App.2d 22",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        2604249
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-2d/60/0022-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "274 N.E.2d 10",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "108 Ill.App. 2d 150",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        1595880
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-2d/108/0150-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "120 N.E. 553",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "284 Ill. 465",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        4917834
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/284/0465-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "145 N.E. 706",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "314 Ill. 602",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5131849
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/314/0602-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "28 N.E.2d 111",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "374 Ill. 87",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2531837
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/374/0087-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "137 N.E.2d 54",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "9 Ill.2d 46",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        5320614
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/9/0046-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "198 N.E.2d 825",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "31 Ill.2d 51",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        2833675
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/31/0051-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 462,
    "char_count": 8257,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.756,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.4325812078829273e-07,
      "percentile": 0.6516074875407794
    },
    "sha256": "0aacaeda603d94cf6c04e18f86dc990a9ce5d42a1a6f065de204c7a563c9e18b",
    "simhash": "1:99733cc4d65a81a1",
    "word_count": 1405
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:04:19.595106+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. Eugene Thomas, Defendant-Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. JUSTICE ADESKO\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nAfter a jury trial, Eugene Thomas, was found guilty of jumping bail. The trial court sentenced the defendant to the Illinois State Penitentiary for a period of not less than three years and not more than five years. The defendant raises the following two issues for review:\n1. Whether the trial court properly denied the defendant\u2019s request for a continuance; and\n2. Whether the trial court properly sustained the State\u2019s objection to defendant\u2019s testimony as to his intention at the time of the offense.\nThe facts are as follows:\nOn April 28, 1964, the defendant was arrested for burglary by Officer Giraldi. He was admitted to bail on May 15, 1964, and ordered to appear on May 22, 1964. On May 22, 1964, the defendant appeared as instructed but the case was continued and the defendant was ordered to appear on June 12, 1964. Officer Giraldi testified that he was in court on June 12, 1964, for about four hours starting at 9:30 A.M. and that he did not see the defendant at all during that time. The defendant testified that he visited the court on June 12, 1964, at about noon, but was told by a cleric that his case was not scheduled.\nThe defendant failed to appear on June 12, 1964, so the court on the motion of the State, entered a bond forfeiture and a warrant. Notice of the bond forfeiture was filled out by the clerk on June 15, 1964, and sent to the defendant at 6151 S. Champlain. The defendant testified that he has lived at 6151 S. Champlain since 1940. The defendant failed to respond to the notice of the bond forfeiture and on December 29, 1965, he was indicted for jumping bail. On January 17, 1966, the indictment was stricken with leave to reinstate. On December 22, 1969, the defendant was arrested by Officer Moran and on December 30, 1969, the jumping bail indictment was reinstated.\nThe defendant\u2019s trial for jumping bail commenced on February 18, 1970, after three continuances. Charles Ciselc, Deputy Clerk of the Circuit Court testified that he was in Judge Napoli\u2019s courtroom on June 12, 1964, and that the Memorandum of Orders and the Official Journal of the clerk\u2019s office both make reference to the defendant on that day and that they indicate that he was not present when called.\nThe defense attempted to obtain the defendant\u2019s testimony regarding his state of mind at the time of the offense. The court sustained the State\u2019s objection to the question. The defendant\u2019s request for a one day continuance to obtain defendant\u2019s wife as a witness was denied. The court granted the defendant a two hour recess.\nDefendant urges that the trial court committed reversible error in denying a continuance of the trial on motion of defendant\u2019s counsel.\nOn January 30, 1970, the defendant stated that he was ready for trial. The jury was selected on February 18, 1970. On February 19, 1970, the defendant requested a one day continuance in order to obtain a witness. Defendant\u2019s motion for a continuance was made after the prosecution had rested. The court granted the defendant a two hour noon recess on February 19,1970 to find the witness.\nDefendant\u2019s counsel stated that the missing witness, defendant\u2019s wife, would generally corroborate the matters which the defendant uncontradictedly testified to that related to her. The missing witness did not go to court with the defendant on the day in question, June 12, 1964. The defendant has failed to show the materiality of the testimony of the proposed witness and had sufficient time to subpoena his witness.\nThe matter of granting a continuance is within the sound discretion of the trial court and it is only where the record shows an abuse of such discretion that the conviction will be reversed. People v. Harper, 31 Ill.2d 51, 198 N.E.2d 825; People v. Clark, 9 Ill.2d 46, 137 N.E.2d 54.\nIn the case at bar, counsel\u2019s request for a continuance would have resulted in an unnecessary delay in the administration of justice and was properly denied by the trial court.\nThe defendant\u2019s second contention was that the trial court erred when it prevented the defendant from testifying as to his intention at the time of the offense because state of mind was a necessary element of the offense of jumping bail.\nSection 32 \u2014 10 of the Criminal Code provides:\n\u201cWhoever, having been admitted to bail for appearance before any court of record of this State, incurs a forfeiture of the bail and willfully fails to surrender himself within 30 days following the date of such forfeiture * \u201d (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1963, ch. 38, par. 32 \u2014 10)\nSection 4 \u2014 5 of the Criminal Code provides:\n\u201cA person knows, or acts knowingly or with knowledge of:\n(a) The nature or attendant circumstances of his conduct, described by the statute defining the offense, when he is consciously aware that his conduct is of such nature or that such circumstances exist. Knowledge of a material fact includes awareness of the substantial probability that such fact exists.\n(b) The result of his conduct, described by the statute defining the offense, when he is consciously aware that such result is practically certain to be caused by his conduct.\nConduct performed knowingly or with knowledge is performed wilfully, within the meaning of a statute using the latter term, unless the statute clearly requires another meaning.\u201d Ill. Rev. Stat. 1963, ch. 38, par. 4 \u2014 5.\nDefendant\u2019s counsel was not allowed to ask the defendant the following question:\n\u201cMr. Sammons: Q. Did you, at any time between 1964 and today did you have knowledge that you were supposed to surrender?\u201d\nDefendant\u2019s answer to this could not have materially affected the jury\u2019s verdict in view of the evidence introduced at the trial which conclusively showed that the defendant either had or should have had knowledge that he had a duty to return to court for the disposition of his case.\nOne of the conditions of the defendant\u2019s bail was that he appear in court on June 12, 1964. The duty to appear was printed on the reverse side of the bail bond slip which the defendant signed. Defendant admitted that he had done nothing to find out about his case for over four years. He stated that he had previously been placed on bail and, therefore, he was no stranger to bail bond procedure.\nOfficer Giraldi testified that he was in Judge Napoli\u2019s courtroom for four hours on June 12, 1964, and did not see the defendant. The Deputy Clerk of the Circuit Court, Charles Ciszek, testified that his records showed that defendant was not present in Judge Napoli\u2019s courtroom on June 12,1964.\nFinally, the record shows that the Circuit Court clerk mailed a notice to the defendant at 6151 S. Champlain, informing the defendant that he missed his appearance and if he did not surrender himself within 30 days he would forfeit his bond. The clerk testified that the post office did not return the notice. Defendant stated that he had lived at 6151 S. Champlain for over 20 years.\nAll the cases cited by the defendant in support of his second contention dealt with self-defense and either murder or manslaughter and, therefore, were not applicable to the case at bar. People v. Biella, 374 Ill. 87, 28 N.E.2d 111; People v. Spranger, 314 Ill. 602, 145 N.E. 706; People v. Scott, 284 Ill. 465, 120 N.E. 553; People v. Johnson, 108 Ill.App. 2d 150, 274 N.E.2d 10; People v. Millet, 60 Ill.App.2d 22, 208 N.E.2d 670.\nEven if it were error for the trial court to prevent the defendant from answering his counsel\u2019s question, it was harmless error in light of the overwhelming evidence. Defendant made no effort to contact the court or appear therein. Defendant\u2019s answer to the question could not have affected the jury\u2019s verdict.\nFor the reasons given, the judgment of the Circuit Court of Cook County is affirmed.\nJudgment affirmed.\nDIERINGER, P. J., and BURMAN, J., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. JUSTICE ADESKO"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Gerald W. Getty, Public Defender, of Chicago, (Howard Pries, Shelvin Singer, and James J. Doherty, Assistant Public Defenders, of counsel,) for appellant.",
      "Edward V. Hanrahan, State\u2019s Attorney, of Chicago, (Robert A. Novelle and James E. Sternik, Assistant State\u2019s Attorneys, of counsel,) for the People."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "The People of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Eugene Thomas, Defendant-Appellant.\n(No. 55054;\nFirst District\nMarch 8, 1972.\nGerald W. Getty, Public Defender, of Chicago, (Howard Pries, Shelvin Singer, and James J. Doherty, Assistant Public Defenders, of counsel,) for appellant.\nEdward V. Hanrahan, State\u2019s Attorney, of Chicago, (Robert A. Novelle and James E. Sternik, Assistant State\u2019s Attorneys, of counsel,) for the People."
  },
  "file_name": "0535-01",
  "first_page_order": 555,
  "last_page_order": 558
}