{
  "id": 2854391,
  "name": "The People of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, v. Mary Lachota, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "People v. Lachota",
  "decision_date": "1914-02-17",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 19,515",
  "first_page": "201",
  "last_page": "202",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "185 Ill. App. 201"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 159,
    "char_count": 1950,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.502,
    "sha256": "5f4b7889cf5c7821f5233030c70a449b34e106c27f982fd4b4be8ed4da76b007",
    "simhash": "1:6b365ca4d08daafd",
    "word_count": 320
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:43:38.716309+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "The People of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, v. Mary Lachota, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Smith\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n2. Cbimmal law, \u00a7 409 \u2014how variance between information and judgment raised. A motion to vacate a judgment entered on a plea of guilty raises the question as to whether defendant was adjudged guilty of the offense charged in the information.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Smith"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "George W. Blackwell, for plaintiff in error.",
      "Maclay Hoyne, for defendant in error; Francis E. Hinckley and Edward E. Wilson, of counsel."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "The People of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, v. Mary Lachota, Plaintiff in Error.\nGen. No. 19,515.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Criminal law, \u00a7 371 \u2014what constitutes a variance between information and judgment. Under an information charging that defendant, being the parent of a certain child, \u201cdid unlawfully, wilfully and knowingly encourage, aid, cause, abet, connive to the dependency and delinquency to said child, contrary to form of the statutes, etc, a judgment, based on a plea of guilty, reciting that \u201csaid defendant is guilty of contributing to the delinquency\u201d of said child is erroneous as not responding to the averments of the information.\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Rufus F. Robinson, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1913.\nReversed and remanded.\nOpinion filed February 17, 1914.\nRehearing denied March 2, 1914.\nStatement of the Case.\nProceeding on information by The People of the State of Illinois against Mary Lachota for abetting and conniving in the delinquency and dependency of her minor child. A judgment of conviction was entered on a plea of guilty, which judgment defendant attempted to have vacated on the ground of a variance between the information and the judgment. The motion to vacate being denied, she brings error.\nGeorge W. Blackwell, for plaintiff in error.\nMaclay Hoyne, for defendant in error; Francis E. Hinckley and Edward E. Wilson, of counsel.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Yols. XI lo XV, same topic rnd section \"umber.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vfils, XI to XV, game topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0201-01",
  "first_page_order": 227,
  "last_page_order": 228
}