{
  "id": 4748254,
  "name": "William Million v. The People",
  "name_abbreviation": "Million v. People",
  "decision_date": "1880-07-02",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "537",
  "last_page": "538",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "6 Ill. App. 537"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "77 Ill. 25",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        821731
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/77/0025-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 153,
    "char_count": 1759,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.5,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.2240919645422112e-07,
      "percentile": 0.6012835111236214
    },
    "sha256": "a2af5157d0ea2bd612b853516f1be19a6f16cc449ea5c57e7fb3b81b6424c200",
    "simhash": "1:545cdf941e1e5130",
    "word_count": 300
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:46:27.659948+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "William Million v. The People."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nPlaintiff in error was indicted for an assault upon one Frank Blackburn with intent to commit murder. The jury returned a verdict finding him guilty of an assault with a deadly weapon upon the person of Edward Blackburn, when no considerable prevocation appeared. Hpon this verdict a judgment of conviction was entered and a fine inflicted upon plaintiff in error and he was ordered to stand committed until the fine and costs should be paid. We have examined the briefs filed on the part of The People under leave of the court this day granted, as well as those for plaintiff in error, and although numerous errors are assigned and discussed, we deem it unnecessary to notice any of them except that which asks a reversal on account of the variance between the indictment and the verdict in the name of the person assaulted.\nThis variance we regard as fatal to the judgment, and it must be reversed and a new trial awarded. 1 Whart. Crim. Law, 256-8.\nBeversed and remanded.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Messrs. Morrison, Whitlock & Lippincott, for plaintiff in error;",
      "Mr. Edward L. McDonald, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "William Million v. The People.\nCriminal law \u2014 Indictment\u2014Variance.\u2014Where, upon an indictment for an assault with intent to murder, upon one \u201c Frank\u201d Blackburn, the jury returned a verdict of guilty of assault upon \u201cEdward\" Blackburn, and there was judgment upon the verdict, the variance was held fatal.\nError. to the Circuit Court of Morgan county; the Hon Cyrus Epler, Judge, presiding.\nOpinion filed July 2, 1880.\nMessrs. Morrison, Whitlock & Lippincott, for plaintiff in error;\nthat the variance is fatal, cited Wharton on Homicide, 796; 2 Hawkins, 319; Wharton on Criminal Law, 250; 2 Russell on Crimes, 788.\nThe question whether the implement used was a deadly weapon is for the jury: Roach v. The People, 77 Ill. 25.\nMr. Edward L. McDonald, for defendant in error."
  },
  "file_name": "0537-01",
  "first_page_order": 535,
  "last_page_order": 536
}
