{ "id": 3206604, "name": "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ALLAN E. SWANSON, Defendant-Appellant", "name_abbreviation": "People v. Swanson", "decision_date": "1980-05-23", "docket_number": "No. 79-259", "first_page": "245", "last_page": "247", "citations": [ { "type": "official", "cite": "84 Ill. App. 3d 245" } ], "court": { "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.", "id": 8837, "name": "Illinois Appellate Court" }, "jurisdiction": { "id": 29, "name_long": "Illinois", "name": "Ill." }, "cites_to": [ { "cite": "379 N.E.2d 94", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "N.E.2d", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "62 Ill. App. 3d 523", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d", "case_ids": [ 5621303 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill-app-3d/62/0523-01" ] }, { "cite": "308 N.E.2d 377", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "N.E.2d", "year": 1978, "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "17 Ill. App. 3d 535", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d", "case_ids": [ 2509911 ], "year": 1978, "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill-app-3d/17/0535-01" ] }, { "cite": "314 N.E.2d 197", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "N.E.2d", "year": 1974, "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "20 Ill. App. 3d 1085", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d", "case_ids": [ 5345331 ], "year": 1974, "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill-app-3d/20/1085-01" ] } ], "analysis": { "cardinality": 291, "char_count": 3401, "ocr_confidence": 0.837, "pagerank": { "raw": 1.316222169506062e-07, "percentile": 0.6256032687620012 }, "sha256": "000dcc620608441e4fa8c4a3f65067294c625ab4e1aa774d22d0dda4eb1daeb3", "simhash": "1:00681d7f7b9b80cb", "word_count": 562 }, "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:36:38.181565+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. ALLAN E. SWANSON, Defendant-Appellant." ], "opinions": [ { "text": "Mr. JUSTICE WOODWARD\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nDefendant, Allan Swanson, was tried by a jury and found not guilty of battery and guilty of reckless conduct. He was sentenced to one year probation. On appeal he contends that he was not proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.\nThe facts are basically undisputed. Defendant lived with a woman and her five-year-old son, Joshua. Both the defendant and the woman shared the responsibility of disciplining the child. On November 4,1978, defendant, while disciplining Joshua, spanked him with one of the child\u2019s belts. As the child squirmed, some of the blows fell on his back and chest. Defendant then explained to Joshua why he had been disciplined. Neither defendant nor Joshua\u2019s mother noticed any marks on the child\u2019s back or chest. The following day, a relative who was babysitting for Joshua noticed a number of marks on the child\u2019s back and chest which appeared to have been made by a strap or belt; she took him to the hospital and contacted the police. Defendant was thereafter arrested and charged.\nDefendant\u2019s sole contention on appeal is that he was not proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The basis for this argument is that the acts of defendant constitute no more than the reasonable discipline of a child. In line with this argument, defendant notes that the Committee Comments to section 12 \u2014 5 of the Criminal Code of 1961 (Ill. Ann. Stat., ch. 38, par. 12 \u2014 5, Committee Comments, at 572 (Smith-Hurd 1979)) state that \u201creckless conduct\u201d is aimed primarily at the type of conduct involved in a reckless homicide.\nWe agree that the cases to date under section 12 \u2014 5 generally have dealt with such life-threatening situations. (See People v. Johnson (1974), 20 Ill. App. 3d 1085, 314 N.E.2d 197; People v. Brownlee (1974), 17 Ill. App. 3d 535, 308 N.E.2d 377; People v. Vassar (1978), 62 Ill. App. 3d 523, 379 N.E.2d 94.) However, while the Committee Comment may be correct in noting that the offense of reckless conduct is directed \u201cprimarily\u201d toward conduct which places a person in danger of extreme bodily harm or death, the legislature did not draw the statute so narrowly as to have it apply exclusively to such actions.\nIn the absence of a change in the statute by the legislature, or an expression by the legislature of an intent different than that which is shown by the language of the statute, we must conclude that the jury, having heard and weighed the testimony and other evidence, had a sufficient basis to find that defendant recklessly (as defined in Ill. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 38, par. 4 \u2014 6) performed the acts in question. No error is asserted by the defendant in reference to jury instructions; the record shows that at defendant\u2019s request, the court gave Illinois Pattern Instructions, Criminal, Nos. 5.01, 11.13 and 11.14 (1968), all dealing with the charge of reckless conduct. Accordingly, the verdict and judgment should stand.\nAffirmed.\nNASH and LINDBERG, JJ., concur.", "type": "majority", "author": "Mr. JUSTICE WOODWARD" } ], "attorneys": [ "Mary Robinson and Elizabeth Clarke, both of State Appellate Defender\u2019s Office, of Elgin, for appellant.", "Daniel D. Doyle, State\u2019s Attorney, of Rockford (Phyllis J. Perko and-Martin P. Moltz, both of State\u2019s Attorneys Appellate Service Commission, of counsel), for the People." ], "corrections": "", "head_matter": "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ALLAN E. SWANSON, Defendant-Appellant.\nSecond District\nNo. 79-259\nOpinion filed May 23, 1980.\nMary Robinson and Elizabeth Clarke, both of State Appellate Defender\u2019s Office, of Elgin, for appellant.\nDaniel D. Doyle, State\u2019s Attorney, of Rockford (Phyllis J. Perko and-Martin P. Moltz, both of State\u2019s Attorneys Appellate Service Commission, of counsel), for the People." }, "file_name": "0245-01", "first_page_order": 267, "last_page_order": 269 }