{
  "id": 2627390,
  "name": "The People of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, vs. Bennett Twitty, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "People v. Twitty",
  "decision_date": "1950-01-18",
  "docket_number": "No. 31191",
  "first_page": "60",
  "last_page": "61",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "405 Ill. 60"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "397 Ill. 456",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2464568
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/397/0456-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "393 Ill. 590",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2477063
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/393/0590-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "388 Ill. 212",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2501228
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/388/0212-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "355 Ill. 562",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5286735
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/355/0562-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "400 Ill. 432",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5306872
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/400/0432-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 184,
    "char_count": 2178,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.788,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.9433712257364641e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7358093078013429
    },
    "sha256": "567aac76f8f9d6f72bcc0474ac3bfa19753fb6d581e79f83d2581be8ece3f5da",
    "simhash": "1:d5420d7b8b3490f9",
    "word_count": 381
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:56:02.749721+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, vs. Bennett Twitty, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Gunn\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nPlaintiff in error, Bennett Twitty, hereinafter named defendant, was tried and convicted in the circuit court of Winnebago County at the October term, 1947, of the crimes of rape and indecent liberties, and was sentenced to ten years in the penitentiary. He brings this writ of error upon the common-law record only. The cause was tried before a jury and no bill of exceptions was saved.\nThe error assigned is the refusal of the court to grant a new trial, and while other grounds are set forth in the formal motion, the only error argued is newly discovered evidence. This is presented to the court in the form of affidavits. We have held many times that affidavits are not a part of the common-law record in criminal cases. As late as the case of People v. Loftus, 400 Ill. 432, we announced that \u201cwhen the review is had upon the common-law record, the sole matter only that may be considered by the court is error appearing upon the face of the record, and matters may not be added by argument, affidavit, or otherwise to supply or expand the record.\u201d\nNo question is raised as to the fairness of the trial or the conduct thereof by the court. Since the affidavits. presented are no part of the record, this alleged error, under many authorities, is not open to review. People v. Reese, 355 Ill. 562; People v. Johns, 388 Ill. 212; People v. Montville, 393 Ill. 590; People v. Griffin, 397 Ill. 456.\nWhile not before us, we might add we have examined the matter contained in the brief and argument of plaintiff in error, and find that even were it a part of a proper bill of exceptions, it would be wholly insufficient ground upon which to reverse the judgment.\nThe- judgment of the circuit court of Winnebago County is accordingly affirmed.\n, Judgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Gunn"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Bennett Twitty, pro se.",
      "Ivan A. Elliott, Attorney General, of Springfield, and Robert R. Canfield, State\u2019s Attorney, of Rockford, (Dale F. Conde, of Rockford, and Harry L. Pate, of Tuscola, of counsel,) for the People."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "(No. 31191.\nThe People of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, vs. Bennett Twitty, Plaintiff in Error.\nOpinion filed January 18, 1950.\nBennett Twitty, pro se.\nIvan A. Elliott, Attorney General, of Springfield, and Robert R. Canfield, State\u2019s Attorney, of Rockford, (Dale F. Conde, of Rockford, and Harry L. Pate, of Tuscola, of counsel,) for the People."
  },
  "file_name": "0060-01",
  "first_page_order": 60,
  "last_page_order": 61
}