{ "id": 3301722, "name": "James Herder v. The People of the State of Illinois", "name_abbreviation": "Herder v. People", "decision_date": "1904-04-20", "docket_number": "", "first_page": "50", "last_page": "51", "citations": [ { "type": "official", "cite": "209 Ill. 50" } ], "court": { "name_abbreviation": "Ill.", "id": 8772, "name": "Illinois Supreme Court" }, "jurisdiction": { "id": 29, "name_long": "Illinois", "name": "Ill." }, "cites_to": [ { "cite": "188 Ill. 545", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill.", "case_ids": [ 3235409 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill/188/0545-01" ] }, { "cite": "156 Ill. 94", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill.", "case_ids": [ 3021063 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill/156/0094-01" ] }, { "cite": "115 Ill. 566", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill.", "case_ids": [ 2876358 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill/115/0566-01" ] }, { "cite": "191 Ill. 594", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill.", "case_ids": [ 3245819 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill/191/0594-01" ] }, { "cite": "201 Ill. 499", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill.", "case_ids": [ 5593496 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill/201/0499-01" ] } ], "analysis": { "cardinality": 231, "char_count": 3602, "ocr_confidence": 0.584, "pagerank": { "raw": 1.4298003686339958e-07, "percentile": 0.6510555248587852 }, "sha256": "c938e86ae8dc8de74c8a8208bca57ac7b726b6b481b29985d403329c657e52e7", "simhash": "1:be778c58598c6c10", "word_count": 650 }, "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:15:21.350466+00:00", "provenance": { "date_added": "2019-08-29", "source": "Harvard", "batch": "2018" }, "casebody": { "judges": [], "parties": [ "James Herder v. The People of the State of Illinois." ], "opinions": [ { "text": "Mr. Chief Justice Hand\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nThe plaintiff in error was indicted jointly with Ed. Colvin and Jamps Shufeldt for the crime of robbery, by the grand jury of Peoria county, and upon a trial, his co-defendants not having been arrested, was found guilty and sentenced to the penitentiary for an indeterminate period.\nIt is first assigned as error that the verdict was contrary to the evidence. The plaintiff in error made no motion for a new trial. The question of the sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict is not therefore raised upon this record and is not presented to this court for determination. In Call v. People, 201 Ill. 499, on page 500 it was said: \u201cThe rule is well settled in this State that where there has been a trial by jury, the errors relied on for a reversal in this court must have been first called to the attention of the trial court by motion for a new trial and an opportunity given that court to correct the same, (Illinois Central Railroad Co. v. Johnson, 191 Ill. 594,) and if the motion is overruled, the motion, ruling of the court thereon and an exception thereto must be preserved by bill of exceptions. In the case of Graham v. People, 115 Ill. 566, at page 569 the court say: \u2018But even if the verdict was not supported by the evidence we could not reverse the judgment for that reason, because the bill of exceptions does not show that any motion was made in the court below for a new trial on that account.\u2019 \u201d\nIt is next assigned as error that the verdict is insufficient to support a judgment of conviction, as the jury did not find, by the verdict, the age of plaintiff in error. The record is silent as to the age of plaintiff in error, except in this: that he testified, while upon the stand as a witness in his own behalf, that he had resided in the city of Peoria twenty-three years. It was, however, not necessary that the jury, by their verdict, find the age of the plaintiff in error. Sullivan v. People, 156 Ill. 94; Porter v. People, 158 id. 370; Doss v. People, id. 660.\nIt is also assigned as error that the jury failed to fix, by their verdict, the time of imprisonment of the plaintiff in error in the penitentiary. It was held in Hagenow v. People, 188 Ill. 545, People v. Murphy, 202 id. 493, and Glover v. People, 204 id. 170, that the statute, where the crime is punishable by imprisonment in the penitentiary for an indeterminate period, does not require the jury to fix the time of the imprisonment of the defendant by their verdict.\nFinding no reversible error in this record, the judgment of the circuit court of Peoria county will be affirmed.\nJudgment affirmed.", "type": "majority", "author": "Mr. Chief Justice Hand" } ], "attorneys": [ "J. W. Culbertson, for plaintiff in error.", "W. V. Tefft, State's Attorney, and Edwin Hedrick, (Oliver R Barrett, of counsel,) for the People." ], "corrections": "", "head_matter": "James Herder v. The People of the State of Illinois.\nOpinion filed April 20, 1904.\n1. Appeals and errors\u2014motion for new trial is essential to question sufficiency of evidence. A motion for new trial is essential to preserve for review the question whether or not the verdict is contrary to the evidence.\n2. Criminal law\u2014verdict for robbery need not find age of accused. A verdict finding the accused guilty of the crime of robbery need not find the age of the accused.\n3. Same\u2014verdict need not fix time of imprisonment. A verdict need not fix the time of imprisonment of a person found guilty of a crime which, under the statute, is punishable by imprisonment in the penitentiary for an indeterminate period.\nWrit of Error to the Circuit Court of Peoria county; the Hon. T. N. Green, Judge, presiding.\nJ. W. Culbertson, for plaintiff in error.\nW. V. Tefft, State's Attorney, and Edwin Hedrick, (Oliver R Barrett, of counsel,) for the People." }, "file_name": "0050-01", "first_page_order": 50, "last_page_order": 51 }