{
  "id": 2677494,
  "name": "The People of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. William Carle, Sr., Defendant-Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "People v. Carle",
  "decision_date": "1972-10-19",
  "docket_number": "No. 71-95",
  "first_page": "709",
  "last_page": "711",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "7 Ill. App. 3d 709"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "45 Ill.2d 63",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        2895335
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/45/0063-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 217,
    "char_count": 2788,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.758,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.2924678943100599e-07,
      "percentile": 0.6201909841075677
    },
    "sha256": "cdc2b86250727f3989425d811d0d1105764a3869babb4d424f91c28d32b37453",
    "simhash": "1:fbbd550e74468fbe",
    "word_count": 466
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:18:17.074050+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. William Carle, Sr., Defendant-Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. JUSTICE DIXON\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nOn January 12, 1971, William R. Carle, Sr., the defendant, age 39, appeared in the Circuit Court of Henderson County. Mr. Carle, who was not represented by an attorney, waived counsel, waived indictment and entered pleas of guilty to two counts of theft of property valued in excess of $150. Judgment was entered pursuant to the pleas and defendant was sentenced to two to five years, concurrent, on each count.\nDefendant appeals contending, first, that he was denied his right to counsel because the trial court did not properly advise him pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 401.\nSupreme Court Rule 401 (a) provides,\n\u201c* * * The court shall not permit a waiver of counsel by a person accused of a crime punishable by imprisonment in the penitentiary without first, * * * informing him of and determining that he understands * * * (3) that he has a right to counsel and if indigent, to have counsel appointed for him by the court.\u201d\nOnly the following appears in the entire record regarding waiver of counsel:\n\u201cThe Court: Is there any question as to whether you want to proceed without an attorney?\nMr. Carle: I am willing to go ahead and do it, because I am guilty. There is no other way to do it, sir.\u201d\nThis procedure certainly did not literally comply with the standards respecting right to counsel and waiver of the right either as expressed in Rule 401 or as stated in People v. Hessenauer, 45 Ill.2d 63. Defendant was not offered nor did he knowingly and understandingly reject representation by appointed counsel.\n\u201cA finding of waiver will not be made unless it appears from the record that * * * the trial judge specifically offered, and the accused knowingly and understandingly rejected, the representation of appointed counsel.\" People v. Hessenauer, supra.\nThe defendant also contends that the comt failed to properly advise him of the consequences of a guilty plea pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 402 (a). We agree. Before entering each plea, the defendant was advised only that he had a right to a trial. He was never advised that he had a right to plead not guilty or that he had a right to be confronted with the witnesses against him. See Committee Comments to S.Ct. Rule 402, Ill. Ann. Stat., Chap. 110A, par. 402.\nWe therefore reverse defendant\u2019s convictions and remand to the Mai court with directions for the Mai court to permit the defendant to withdraw his plea of guilty and plead anew.\nReversed and remanded.\nSTOUDER, P. J., and ALLOY, J., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. JUSTICE DIXON"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Bruce Stratton, of Defender Project, of Ottawa, for appellant.",
      "Lamar Evans, State\u2019s Attorney, of Oquawka, for the People."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "The People of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. William Carle, Sr., Defendant-Appellant.\n(No. 71-95;\nThird District\nOctober 19, 1972.\nBruce Stratton, of Defender Project, of Ottawa, for appellant.\nLamar Evans, State\u2019s Attorney, of Oquawka, for the People."
  },
  "file_name": "0709-01",
  "first_page_order": 731,
  "last_page_order": 733
}