{
  "id": 2523079,
  "name": "The People of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gerald Allen Massie, Defendant-Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "People v. Massie",
  "decision_date": "1972-05-17",
  "docket_number": "No. 71-211",
  "first_page": "432",
  "last_page": "433",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "5 Ill. App. 3d 432"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 162,
    "char_count": 2019,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.736,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.2867235014020558e-07,
      "percentile": 0.6188420637651075
    },
    "sha256": "2b0e60b0d383b5454974941674b6ae570b76d7057d8f5b471fc0953ac11e5169",
    "simhash": "1:5144a84cdeec4553",
    "word_count": 326
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:05:48.814564+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. Gerald Allen Massie, Defendant-Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. JUSTICE ABRAHAMSON\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nThe question presented here is whether a guilty verdict is void for lack of unanimity because, when polled, one of the jurors who signed the verdict responded \u201cI pleaded guilty, yes\u201d to the question, \u201c* # * was and is this now your verdict?\u201d\nNo further inquiry was made of that juror. When the State requested entry of judgment on the verdict, defendant\u2019s counsel objected on the grounds of the juror\u2019s answer and requested time to prepare the necessary motions, mentioning specifically a motion for new trial. The Court thereafter denied his motion for new trial, which did not set forth any objection based on the juror\u2019s answer, and entered judgment of guilty of burglary. After hearing on mitigation and aggravation, defendant was sentenced to one to six years in the penitentiary.\nCounsel for defendant cited no authorities to support his contention that the juror\u2019s answer renders void the guilty verdict which that juror signed, along with the others. The only authorities cited support the requirement of unanimity.\nThe guilty verdict was read in open court by the foreman. The answer of the juror in question included the affirmative word \u201cyes\u201d when asked if it was and is his verdict. The mere fact that prior to his affirmative answer he uttered the words \u201cI pleaded guilty\u201d does not detract in the least from the jury\u2019s unanimity. The judgment of the Court is, therefore, affirmed. This determination of the question presented renders it unnecessary for us to consider the State\u2019s contention that the defendant\u2019s failure to raise this point in his motion for a new trial constitutes a waiver thereof.\nJudgment affirmed.\nT. MORAN and GUILD, JJ., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. JUSTICE ABRAHAMSON"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Ralph Ruebner and Matthew J. Moran, both of Defender Project, of Elgin, for appellant.",
      "Jack Hoogasian, State\u2019s Attorney, of Waukegan, for the People."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "The People of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gerald Allen Massie, Defendant-Appellant.\n(No. 71-211;\nSecond District\nMay 17, 1972.\nRalph Ruebner and Matthew J. Moran, both of Defender Project, of Elgin, for appellant.\nJack Hoogasian, State\u2019s Attorney, of Waukegan, for the People."
  },
  "file_name": "0432-01",
  "first_page_order": 454,
  "last_page_order": 455
}