{
  "id": 3400519,
  "name": "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CHARLES E. MARTINEZ, Defendant-Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "People v. Martinez",
  "decision_date": "1977-11-03",
  "docket_number": "No. 77-325",
  "first_page": "607",
  "last_page": "609",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "54 Ill. App. 3d 607"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "342 N.E.2d 31",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "62 Ill. 2d 323",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        2970812
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/62/0323-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "325 N.E.2d 738",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "year": 1976,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "26 Ill. App. 3d 547",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        2787126
      ],
      "year": 1976,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/26/0547-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "309 N.E.2d 1",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "56 Ill. 2d 493",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        5405202
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/56/0493-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "256 N.E.2d 374",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "120 Ill. App. 2d 170",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        1583520,
        1583510
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-2d/120/0170-02",
        "/ill-app-2d/120/0170-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "340 N.E.2d 63",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "34 Ill. App. 3d 158",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        2960666
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/34/0158-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "365 N.E.2d 729",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "50 Ill. App. 3d 516",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        5642922
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/50/0516-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "431 U.S. 105",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "U.S.",
      "case_ids": [
        2000
      ],
      "weight": 3,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/us/431/0105-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "75 C 1821",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Cow.",
      "weight": 2,
      "opinion_index": 0
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 314,
    "char_count": 4565,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.879,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.4033266686372354e-08,
      "percentile": 0.3394161203992974
    },
    "sha256": "ddd89f0609a57413fe457ff29f5b1a33e5b827b3e3bcfe6f44ea1bddd4223bf4",
    "simhash": "1:13a29bd513fbccaf",
    "word_count": 746
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:56:34.806209+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. CHARLES E. MARTINEZ, Defendant-Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. JUSTICE LINN\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nThe defendant, Charles E. Martinez, was charged by traffic complaints with operating a motor vehicle while his driver\u2019s license was suspended and with following too closely behind another vehicle. (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1975, ch. 95/2, pars. 6 \u2014 303(a), 11 \u2014 710(a).) Although somewhat unclear, the record indicates that the circuit court denied defendant\u2019s written pretrial motion to dismiss the complaint charging operation of a vehicle while defendant\u2019s license was suspended. The court expressly stated the order of denial was final for purposes of appeal, and continued the matter to a later date for disposition on that charge. The record also indicates that defendant entered a plea of not guilty, waived trial by jury and stipulated to the correctness of the complaint charging him with following too closely behind another vehicle, for which he was placed under supervision for a period of 60 days.\nDefendant appeals solely from the order denying his pretrial motion to dismiss the charge of operating a motor vehicle while his driver\u2019s license was suspended. He contends that the order of denial was improperly entered in light of a recent three-judge Federal district court decision in an unpublished memorandum opinion. That court declared the Illinois statute relating to suspension or revocation of drivers\u2019 licenses unconstitutional on the grounds that the statute did not require notice and hearing prior to the licensing authority issuing an order of suspension or revocation. Defendant contended in his pretrial motion to dismiss that he had been denied due process since no prior notice and hearing relating to suspension or revocation of his driver\u2019s license was afforded him. (See Love v. Howlett (N.D. Ill. 1976), No. 75 C 1821, declaring unconstitutional section 6 \u2014 206(a)(3) of the Illinois Motor Vehicle Code (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1975, ch. 95\u00bd, par. 6 \u2014 206(a)3).) We note, however, that Love v. Howlett (N.D. Ill. 1976), No. 75 C 1821, was subsequently overturned by the United States Supreme Court in Dixon v. Love (1977), 431 U.S. 105, 52 L. Ed. 2d 172, 97 S. Ct. 1723. The Supreme Court held that the Illinois statutory provisions relating to suspension and revocation of drivers\u2019 licenses were not violative of due process of law, and that Illinois authorities could properly revoke or suspend drivers\u2019 licenses without predecision administrative hearings. See also People v. Anderson (1977), 50 Ill. App. 3d 516, 365 N.E.2d 729.\nAside from the foregoing, examination of the record of this proceeding indicates that this case involves an attempt to appeal from a nonappealable interlocutory order denying a motion to dismiss a complaint. The appeal must therefore be dismissed for want of jurisdiction in this court. People v. Culhane (1975), 34 Ill. App. 3d 158, 340 N.E.2d 63, and the cases cited therein; Ill. Rev. Stat. 1975, ch. 110A, par. 603.\nThe trial court\u2019s express statement that the order of denial was final for purposes of appeal did not make the order appealable. (See People v. McGary (1970), 120 Ill. App. 2d 170, 256 N.E.2d 374.) The fact that defendant was also placed under supervision on the accompanying charge of following too closely cannot impart jurisdiction to entertain this appeal as to the charge involving the suspended driver\u2019s license because the notice of appeal in no way purports to include an appeal from the former matter. See, e.g., People v. Lilly (1974), 56 Ill. 2d 493, 309 N.E.2d 1.\nFor the foregoing reasons, the appeal taken from the order of the circuit court of Cook County denying defendant\u2019s motion to dismiss the charge of operating a motor vehicle while his driver\u2019s license was suspended is dismissed.\nAppeal dismissed.\nJOHNSON and ROMITI, JJ., concur.\nWe do not express any opinion whether the order placing defendant under supervision would have been appealable in any event under the posture of the Supreme Court Rules. See Ill. Rev. Stat. 1975, ch. 110A, par. 604(b); see also People v. Breen (1975), 26 Ill. App. 3d 547, 325 N.E.2d 738; remanded to circuit court without consideration of the finality of the order sought to be appealed in People v. Breen (1976), 62 Ill. 2d 323, 342 N.E.2d 31.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. JUSTICE LINN"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Charles G. Haskins, of Chicago, for appellant.",
      "Bernard Carey, State\u2019s Attorney, of Chicago (Laurence J. Bolon and Richard J. Barr, Jr., of counsel), for the People."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CHARLES E. MARTINEZ, Defendant-Appellant.\nFirst District (4th Division)\nNo. 77-325\nOpinion filed November 3, 1977.\nCharles G. Haskins, of Chicago, for appellant.\nBernard Carey, State\u2019s Attorney, of Chicago (Laurence J. Bolon and Richard J. Barr, Jr., of counsel), for the People."
  },
  "file_name": "0607-01",
  "first_page_order": 629,
  "last_page_order": 631
}