{
  "id": 2490915,
  "name": "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MILTON MASTIN, Defendant-Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "People v. Mastin",
  "decision_date": "1976-08-25",
  "docket_number": "No. 62518",
  "first_page": "812",
  "last_page": "816",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "41 Ill. App. 3d 812"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "184 N.E.2d 858",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "25 Ill. 2d 204",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        5353184
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/25/0204-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 558,
    "char_count": 9084,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.888,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 9.400688716603778e-08,
      "percentile": 0.5158418502391452
    },
    "sha256": "eb458c2d1bbd7d31b8aed49da5f101ee2b2f23d5b1af4dcc48a979283b15c38a",
    "simhash": "1:bd62a3ecf23329c3",
    "word_count": 1514
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T14:47:10.337116+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. MILTON MASTIN, Defendant-Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. JUSTICE DIERINGER\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nFollowing a bench trial, Milton Mast\u00edn (hereinafter called \u201cdefendant\u201d) was convicted of attempt murder and aggravated battery, and was sentenced to a term of four to six years in the State penitentiary. Defendant was indicted as a co-defendant with Billy Jenkins, but the defendants were granted separate trials.\nThe issue on appeal is whether the defendant was proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of attempt murder by accountability.\nDefendant\u2019s brief on appeal also raised an issue as to whether the defendant was improperly convicted of two crimes arising from a single act, and on this question the State has confessed error and now recommends reversal of the aggravated battery conviction.\nDefendant was charged in connection with the shooting of William Johnson, which occurred at 10:30 p.m. on March 18,1973, in the city of Chicago.\nThe events leading to the shooting commenced earlier on March 18, 1973, when a fight occurred between Jenkins\u2019 sister, Juanita Jones, and Johnson\u2019s sister, Johnnie Mae Allen.\nWhile Johnnie Mae Allen walked with William Johnson toward her home at 64th and South Normal, they were stopped by a car containing five passengers. Juanita Jones got out and the car, with its remaining four passengers, continued northbound on Normal Avenue toward 63rd Street, where it stopped and was parked. Juanita and Johnnie Mae immediately engaged in a heated argument in the street. William Johnson intervened in this fracas only to disarm Juanita, who was brandishing a weapqn (described by witnesses as a knife or a pipe). After this interference, William Johnson moved away from the two arguing women.\nAs to the events which followed, the State presented three witnesses. Testifying were William Johnson (the victim), Johnnie Mae Allen (his sister) and Herbert Bailey (the arresting officer).\nWhile the argument between the two women continued, Johnnie Mae, who was facing north toward Juanita, and in the direction of 63rd Street, noticed three men exiting the car in which Juanita Jones had arrived. Johnnie Mae identified two of the three as Billy Jenkins and Milton Mast\u00edn. She particularly watched Jenkins as the three approached, since he was Juanita\u2019s brother, with whom she was still arguing. As the men came closer, Johnnie Mae Allen saw the defendant hand his gun to Billy Jenkins. Mast\u00edn and Jenkins then proceeded past the two women and on toward Johnson, who was talking to a Mrs. Felton, and was not aware of their appraoch.\nUpon Mrs. Felton\u2019s warning, Johnson turned to find his attackers upon him. The victim attempted to back away from the armed aggressors, but was stalled in his efforts while backing up, into a tree. Sighting an opening between two parked cars, Johnson renewed his flight only to discover the opening had been blocked by the defendant, who obstructed Johnson\u2019s retreat to safety. The defendant then drew back to strike the victim, who fell, eluding the blow. Taking advantage of Johnson\u2019s defenseless position, Jenkins emptied Mas tin\u2019s gun at Johnson, with one of the shots striking the victim in the hip. As Johnson got up, he was grabbed from behind by the defendant. Upon his accomplice\u2019s order to \u201cMove back. Let me shoot,\u201d Mast\u00edn released Johnson. Jenkins\u2019 renewed attempt to murder Johnson failed, as the gun proved to be empty. Johnson then sprung at Jenkins, knocking the gun loose to the ground, and entangling the three men in fisticuffs, whereupon a police car arrived. Noticing the lights and siren of the approaching police car, the defendant and his confederate ceased beating their victim, and together fled northward toward their parked car. Johnson approached the police car and, while leaning against it, and holding his wound, handed Officer Bailey the defendant\u2019s gun and identified the two assailants, who were but 10 to 15 feet away and fleeing the scene. At this point, Officer Bailey approached Mast\u00edn and Jenkins and placed them under arrest.\nAt the trial, Officer Bailey testified Mast\u00edn and Jenkins were 10 to 15 feet away from him when he was told they were the assailants.\nThe defense contended the defendant was not at the place of the shooting, but had remained by the parked car, some 60 feet further north on Normal, near 63rd. James Holiday, a lifelong friend of the defendant, testified that at around 10 p.m. on the night in question he, Billy Jenkins, Juanita Jones and Doris Atkins were leaving Mr. Jenkins\u2019 apartment at 8200 South Eberhart when they bumped into the defendant who was leaving his apartment, which is in the same building. The defendant said this was the first time he ever brought his gun outside with him, stating that twice during some time in the past he had been robbed.\nMast\u00edn alleged he was accepting a ride with Jenkins as far as 64th and Normal on Mastin\u2019s way to 73rd and Union. Holiday testified the car was heading north on Normal when the victim started walking alongside the car shouting, \u201cYou looking for me? Here I am.\u201d\nThe defense witnesses contended all three men in the back seat of the car exited through the left rear door, stating the right rear door was jammed. As the defendant, the last of the three men, was exiting the car, his coat was pushed back revealing his weapon. The gun was then grabbed by Jenkins, without any objection by Mast\u00edn, as Jenkins rushed away before the defendant could stop him.\nBoth Holiday and the defendant testified it was Holiday who accompanied Jenkins back down Normal, while Mast\u00edn remained at the car. Since Mast\u00edn claimed to have been 50 to 60 feet away from where the shooting occurred, he could testify no further as to the events which took place, except to state he was still back at the car when the police officers ordered him to join the others down the street.\nThe defendant claims he was not proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The accountability section of the Illinois Criminal Code provides, in pertinent part:\n\u201cA person is legally accountable for the conduct of another when 000 [ejither before or during the commission of an offense, and with the intent to promote or facilitate such commission, he solicits, aids, abets, agrees or attempts to aid, such other person in the planning or commission of the offense. 6 \"Ill. Rev. Stat. 1973, ch. 38, par. 5\u20142.\nConfronting the court are two totally inconsistent and opposite theories of what actually happened on the night of March 18, 1973, as presented before the trial court through the testimony of five witnesses: the victim, his sister, and a Chicago police officer, versus the defendant and his lifelong friend.\nBy the testimony of the State\u2019s witnesses, Milton Mast\u00edn partook in the search for the intended victim, William Johnson. While approaching Johnson, Mast\u00edn provided Jenkins with the instrumentality of the crime. As Johnson ran for safety, it was Mast\u00edn who prevented his escape and moved to strike him, thus placing Johnson in an even more precarious position. Again, it was Mast\u00edn who grabbed the victim, to release him only upon Jenkins\u2019 express desire to finish him off.\nIf this evidence is believable, it is clear the defendant, both before and during the commission of the offense of attempt murder, and with the intent to promote and facilitate such commission, aided and abetted his confederate Jenkins in the commission of said offense.\nAs mentioned above, the trial court was confronted with two totally inconsistent and opposite theories of what happened. But, mere existence of conflicting testimony will not of itself create a reasonable doubt.\nThe law is well settled in Illinois in regard to a certain aspect of deference owed to a trial judge by courts of review. In the absence of a jury, the credibility of witnesses, the weight to be given their testimony and the inferences!\u00a9 be drawn therefrom are for the trial judge and, upon review, courts of review will not substitute their judgment for his unless it clearly appears there is reasonable doubt of defendant\u2019s guilt. See People v. Guido (1962), 25 Ill. 2d 204, 184 N.E.2d 858.\nHere, it was the province of the trial court, who was aware of the interests of the witnesses in the outcome of the trial, to determine the truth of the matter.\nUpon review of the entire record, we are convinced the evidence fully supports the trial court\u2019s finding of guilt for the offense of attempt murder by accountability.\nFor the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the Circuit Court of Cook County is affirmed as to the conviction of attempt murder, and reversed as to the conviction of aggravated battery.\nAffirmed in part and reversed in part.\nJOHNSON, P. J!, and BURMAN, J., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. JUSTICE DIERINGER"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "James R. Streicker and Allen L. Wiederer, both of State Appellate Defenders Office, of Chicago, for appellant.",
      "Bernard Carey, State\u2019s Attorney, of Chicago (Laurence J. Bolon and Iris E. Sholder, Assistant State\u2019s Attorneys, of counsel), for the People."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MILTON MASTIN, Defendant-Appellant.\nFirst District (4th Division)\nNo. 62518\nOpinion filed August 25, 1976.\nJames R. Streicker and Allen L. Wiederer, both of State Appellate Defenders Office, of Chicago, for appellant.\nBernard Carey, State\u2019s Attorney, of Chicago (Laurence J. Bolon and Iris E. Sholder, Assistant State\u2019s Attorneys, of counsel), for the People."
  },
  "file_name": "0812-01",
  "first_page_order": 840,
  "last_page_order": 844
}